MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8;
 format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2012 10:41:57 +0800
From: raphael@buro.asia
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
        "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>, <stable@vger.kernel.org>,
        Suresh Siddha <suresh.b.siddha@intel.com>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/5] i387: stable kernel backport
In-Reply-To: <CA+55aFxTieMqacU9LN8Xmtb3Os8zkub1P+SKpqFtEBQ11STy7g@mail.gmail.com>
References: <alpine.LFD.2.02.1202221252060.20522@i5.linux-foundation.org>
 <4F456D8F.1080801@zytor.com>
 <CA+55aFw4P1qUye5YOJKSQHX+TfxbEDWMF7LPogj128b6gv2Nqg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CA+55aFziJ=Lw0KxxThwfqRPR+K0OWDorKAfkgKMGPXv5O404JA@mail.gmail.com>
 <4F4584EB.9060605@zytor.com>
 <CA+55aFxC6JwWsNcmkQ+DROXtWCzaq52DuX5aMJZfXMLoNCbsWg@mail.gmail.com>
 <20120223003706.GA3246@kroah.com>
 <6e9d38ffcb1a66f62a335450d4722809@buro.asia>
 <CA+55aFxTieMqacU9LN8Xmtb3Os8zkub1P+SKpqFtEBQ11STy7g@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <e709c3b5c5b2aa6e6a9d049f3af857e3@buro.asia>
User-Agent: Roundcube Webmail/0.6
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 2014
Lines: 50

On 23.02.2012 10:55, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 22, 2012 at 5:47 PM,  <raphael@buro.asia> wrote:
>>
>> Thank you for backporting this patchset to -stable. FWIW, the test 
>> machine I
>> had been working with has an uptime of 4 days now, with the patchset 
>> in
>> attachment applied on top of 3.2.6, so if it were unpractical to 
>> trim it
>> down further you can find solace in that it does not break anything.
>
> Hmm. The patches in your attachements are whitespace-damaged. I was
> going to apply that series and see what the difference was to my
> minimal trial, but with the corruption that isn't possible.
>
> I didn't find anything obviously wrong in my series, so..
>
> Could you send the patches you used for your backport with the
> whitespace fixed, and preferably with the patch numbering explained?

The numbering is just so I can apply the patches in the right order 
with a for loop in the packaging script. The missing 7* was the 
experimental patches we tried which moved has_fpu in the thread_info 
struct (which did not work).

The patchset is simply made of:
be98c2cdb15ba26148cd2bd58a857d4f7759ed38 (unmodified)
5b1cbac37798805c1fee18c8cebe5c0a13975b17 (")
c38e23456278e967f094b08247ffc3711b1029b2 (")
15d8791cae75dca27bfda8ecfe87dca9379d6bb0 (")
b6c66418dcad0fcf83cd1d0a39482db37bf4fc41 (")
6d59d7a9f5b723a7ac1925c136e93ec83c0c3043 (")
b3b0870ef3ffed72b92415423da864f440f57ad6 (")
4903062b5485f0e2c286a23b44c9b59d9b017d53: this one requires a slight 
modification:
-#define safe_address (kstat_cpu(0).cpustat.user)
instead of:
-#define safe_address 
(__get_cpu_var(kernel_cpustat).cpustat[CPUTIME_USER])
f94edacf998516ac9d849f7bc6949a703977a7f3 (unmodified)
34ddc81a230b15c0e345b6b253049db731499f7e (")

>
>                    Linus

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/