Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752339AbdGUGdD (ORCPT ); Fri, 21 Jul 2017 02:33:03 -0400 Received: from mx2.suse.de ([195.135.220.15]:47369 "EHLO mx1.suse.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751662AbdGUGdB (ORCPT ); Fri, 21 Jul 2017 02:33:01 -0400 Subject: Re: [PATCH 4.12 26/84] x86/xen/efi: Initialize only the EFI struct members used by Xen To: Daniel Kiper , gregkh@linuxfoundation.org Cc: Ingo Molnar , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, stable@vger.kernel.org, Boris Ostrovsky , Ard Biesheuvel , Linus Torvalds , Peter Zijlstra , Thomas Gleixner , andrew.cooper3@citrix.com, linux-efi@vger.kernel.org, matt@codeblueprint.co.uk, xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org References: <20170719092322.362625377@linuxfoundation.org> <20170719092323.396710042@linuxfoundation.org> <20170719103747.GZ4448@olila.local.net-space.pl> <20170720083910.aygobq7t7g7laszt@gmail.com> <20170720091639.GA1071@kroah.com> <20170720123321.GK9468@olila.local.net-space.pl> From: Juergen Gross Message-ID: Date: Fri, 21 Jul 2017 08:32:57 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.2.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20170720123321.GK9468@olila.local.net-space.pl> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1415 Lines: 34 On 20/07/17 14:33, Daniel Kiper wrote: > On Thu, Jul 20, 2017 at 11:16:39AM +0200, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: >> On Thu, Jul 20, 2017 at 10:39:10AM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote: >>> >>> * Daniel Kiper wrote: >>> >>>> Hey Greg, >>>> >>>> On Wed, Jul 19, 2017 at 11:43:32AM +0200, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: >>>>> 4.12-stable review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let me know. >>>> >>>> Why did you skip this patch for 4.11? IMO it should be applied there too. >>> >>> The thing is, this patch should probaly not even be in v4.12, as it should only >>> make any difference if there's a separate _bug_ in the kernel. >>> >>> This patch makes things more robust going forward, but I question that it needs to >>> be in -stable. >> >> Yeah, good point, I'm going to go drop it entirely from the 4.12-stable >> tree as it obviously isn't stable material, sorry for not catching that >> before. > > Wait a minute. IIRC, Juergen told me last week that this patch fixes a bug > found/assigned by/to him. Juergen? If it is true then I would apply it to > stable. If I am wrong you can drop it. I'm not sure both patches (this one and upstream 457ea3f7e97881f) are needed. I have got a report about a failing boot and with both patches applied the boot is working. I will ask if 457ea3f7e97881f alone works, too. If it doesn't I'll request this patch to be added to stable again. Juergen