Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
Date:   Wed, 14 Mar 2018 11:50:00 +0000
From:   Lorenzo Pieralisi <lorenzo.pieralisi@arm.com>
To:     Dexuan Cui <decui@microsoft.com>
Cc:     "'bhelgaas@google.com'" <bhelgaas@google.com>,
        "'linux-pci@vger.kernel.org'" <linux-pci@vger.kernel.org>,
        KY Srinivasan <kys@microsoft.com>,
        Stephen Hemminger <sthemmin@microsoft.com>,
        "'olaf@aepfle.de'" <olaf@aepfle.de>,
        "'apw@canonical.com'" <apw@canonical.com>,
        "'jasowang@redhat.com'" <jasowang@redhat.com>,
        "'linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org'" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        "'driverdev-devel@linuxdriverproject.org'" 
        <driverdev-devel@linuxdriverproject.org>,
        Haiyang Zhang <haiyangz@microsoft.com>,
        "'vkuznets@redhat.com'" <vkuznets@redhat.com>,
        "'marcelo.cerri@canonical.com'" <marcelo.cerri@canonical.com>,
        "Michael Kelley (EOSG)" <Michael.H.Kelley@microsoft.com>,
        "'stable@vger.kernel.org'" <stable@vger.kernel.org>,
        'Jack Morgenstein' <jackm@mellanox.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 6/6] PCI: hv: fix 2 hang issues in hv_compose_msi_msg()
Message-ID: <20180314115000.GC27868@e107981-ln.cambridge.arm.com>
References: <20180306182128.23281-1-decui@microsoft.com>
 <20180306182128.23281-7-decui@microsoft.com>
 <20180307123441.GD15139@e107981-ln.cambridge.arm.com>
 <KL1P15301MB0006B22926A4DC338BFEB78DBFD80@KL1P15301MB0006.APCP153.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM>
 <SG2P15301MB00158D30D602950F05F8B14ABFD20@SG2P15301MB0015.APCP153.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <SG2P15301MB00158D30D602950F05F8B14ABFD20@SG2P15301MB0015.APCP153.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.24 (2015-08-30)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Tue, Mar 13, 2018 at 06:23:39PM +0000, Dexuan Cui wrote:

[...]

> Hi Lorenzo, Bjorn, and all,
> Do you need more ACKs? Currently Michael and Haiyang reviewed and ack'd 
> the patchset.
> 
> Should I send a v4 that just removes the "CC: stable@vger.kernel.org" tag
> for patches 1, 2, 4 and 5? I tend to avoid a v4 as I supppose it would be 
> easier if you just remove the tags if you belive it's necessary (IMHO all the
> 6 paches are not big and it would be great if we can have all of them in 
> the old stable kernels, but I respect your decision).

I think you need a v4 since for patches that are actually fixing a bug I
want a Fixes: tag added and I want them to be applicable independently
of other patches in the series. Send them in a separate series if you
prefer - I just want to make sure they apply independently.

As for marking patches for stable kernels, I do not think it is right
to send cosmetic churn to stable kernels anyway, at least that's my
reading of the policy.

You can easily post a v4 with patches reshuffled - I will apply them
accordingly.

Before re-posting please read this to improve formatting (I can do it
for you but while at it you can do it yourself):

https://marc.info/?l=linux-pci&m=150905742808166&w=2

Thanks,
Lorenzo