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:   Tue, 8 Jan 2019 10:09:51 -0800
From:   Guenter Roeck <linux@roeck-us.net>
To:     Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
Cc:     linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, torvalds@linux-foundation.org,
        akpm@linux-foundation.org, shuah@kernel.org, patches@kernelci.org,
        ben.hutchings@codethink.co.uk, lkft-triage@lists.linaro.org,
        stable@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4.19 000/170] 4.19.14-stable review
Message-ID: <20190108180951.GB28031@roeck-us.net>
References: <20190107104452.953560660@linuxfoundation.org>
 <20190108172503.GA28031@roeck-us.net>
 <20190108175640.GA2461@kroah.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
In-Reply-To: <20190108175640.GA2461@kroah.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.24 (2015-08-30)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Tue, Jan 08, 2019 at 06:56:40PM +0100, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 08, 2019 at 09:25:03AM -0800, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> > On Mon, Jan 07, 2019 at 01:30:27PM +0100, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> > > This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 4.19.14 release.
> > > There are 170 patches in this series, all will be posted as a response
> > > to this one.  If anyone has any issues with these being applied, please
> > > let me know.
> > > 
> > > Responses should be made by Wed Jan  9 10:43:54 UTC 2019.
> > > Anything received after that time might be too late.
> > > 
> > 
> > Still (for v4.19.13-171-gc68ce175c3b8):
> > 
> > arch/powerpc/kernel/signal_64.c: In function ‘sys_rt_sigreturn’:
> > arch/powerpc/kernel/signal_64.c:761:21: error: ‘msr’ undeclared 
> > 
> > AFAICS commit 5c784c8414fba ("powerpc/tm: Remove msr_tm_active()") is missing.
> 
> Breno on this thread just said that this patch should not be applied,
> and another one will be submitted upstream instead to solve the problem
> correctly and then we can backport it.
> 
> So we can live with this build issue for now.
> 

I think you should drop the offending patch in this case. It doesn't make
sense to keep it - all it accomplishes is to break various builds. What is
the point of doing that ? Is that somehow better than living with the bug
it is supposed to fix ?

Guenter