Sounds good. Thanks for the context.
I'll keep this on my plate and I'll turn something around once I've
had a chance to test a bit, probably next week.
On Fri, Oct 27, 2017 at 1:24 PM, Ingo Molnar <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> * Craig Bergstrom <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Reverting seems like the right approach at the moment. My apologies
>> for the breakage so late the in the cycle.
>
> Note that there's no need for you to apologize and you carry exactly zero amount
> of blame for the late-cycle breakage: it was my decision to send it to Linus so
> quickly, you never asked for it to be sent upstream on such a short notice.
>
> ( Classic "patch makes sense, looks good, other arches ar doing this too, and I
> tested it myself too on multiple systems, so it must be obviously fine for
> everyone" moment. )
>
> Your change still makes sense from a robustness POV, so please send it again with
> the suggested fixes - and I'll be more careful with the upstream merge this time.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Ingo
From 1582439962923754008@xxx Fri Oct 27 19:25:49 +0000 2017
X-GM-THRID: 1582105239086831553
X-Gmail-Labels: Inbox,Category Forums