Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755251Ab2FSWT6 (ORCPT ); Tue, 19 Jun 2012 18:19:58 -0400 Received: from s15943758.onlinehome-server.info ([217.160.130.188]:43515 "EHLO mail.x86-64.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753461Ab2FSWT5 (ORCPT ); Tue, 19 Jun 2012 18:19:57 -0400 Date: Wed, 20 Jun 2012 00:19:56 +0200 From: Borislav Petkov To: Henrique de Moraes Holschuh Cc: Borislav Petkov , LKML , x86 , Peter Zijlstra , "H. Peter Anvin" , Ingo Molnar , Andreas Herrmann , Dimitri Sivanich , Dmitry Adamushko , Greg Kroah-Hartman Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86, microcode: Make reload interface per system Message-ID: <20120619221956.GB5996@aftab.osrc.amd.com> References: <20120613065119.GB15661@aftab.osrc.amd.com> <20120613123649.GA26012@khazad-dum.debian.net> <20120613161139.GA18450@aftab.osrc.amd.com> <20120615123749.GC6083@aftab.osrc.amd.com> <1339764161.2559.63.camel@twins> <20120615125240.GD6083@aftab.osrc.amd.com> <20120615165231.GA9169@aftab.osrc.amd.com> <20120619024639.GB6186@khazad-dum.debian.net> <20120619050325.GA31591@aftab.osrc.amd.com> <20120619185736.GD18816@khazad-dum.debian.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20120619185736.GD18816@khazad-dum.debian.net> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1731 Lines: 48 On Tue, Jun 19, 2012 at 03:57:36PM -0300, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote: > I was wondering whether it would be worthwhile to backport the new ABI > for the Debian 3.2 kernel or not. Probably not. Nope, changing released kernels' ABI is a no-no. > Backporting to 3.2 and 3.0 is straigthforward, however it will look > nasty as one has to "inappropriately touch" the cpu sysdev class to > get the attribute group directly connected to /sys/devices/system/cpu. > > I did notice there were no stable backports of the error unwind during > module init, but that one is a very rarely used codepath. Maybe worth > to backport a fix to stable, though. Yeah, stable rules say we only backport regression fixes and although missing error unwind is a small regression, I've never heard of it causing trouble. > Well, my ack is unimportant in the "this is not an area of the kernel > I have any authority to ack things" sense. But we don't have a > "I-wanna-that-by:" or even a "Thumbs-up-by:"... Which reminds me, I forgot to add your tags to the patches, sorry. @hpa: Would you please add Henrique's {Tested,Acked}-by tags to the patches? Thanks. > > Thanks for review and testing, I'll send out the patches soon. > > Thank you for addressing these issues and writing the patches! Sure, absolutely! :-) -- Regards/Gruss, Boris. Advanced Micro Devices GmbH Einsteinring 24, 85609 Dornach GM: Alberto Bozzo Reg: Dornach, Landkreis Muenchen HRB Nr. 43632 WEEE Registernr: 129 19551 -- 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/