From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S1751207AbcETRl1 (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Fri, 20 May 2016 13:41:27 -0400
Received: from mail-wm0-f65.google.com ([74.125.82.65]:35095 "EHLO
	mail-wm0-f65.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
	with ESMTP id S1750792AbcETRl0 (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Fri, 20 May 2016 13:41:26 -0400
Date: Fri, 20 May 2016 19:41:20 +0200
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
To: Yu-cheng Yu <yu-cheng.yu@intel.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, x86@kernel.org,
        "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
        Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>,
        Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org>,
        Sai Praneeth Prakhya <sai.praneeth.prakhya@intel.com>,
        "Ravi V. Shankar" <ravi.v.shankar@intel.com>,
        Fenghua Yu <fenghua.yu@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/4] x86/fpu/state: Fix XSAVES issues - Part 1
Message-ID: <20160520174120.GB9970@gmail.com>
References: <cover.1463070031.git.yu-cheng.yu@intel.com>
 <20160520071200.GC4003@gmail.com>
 <20160520154111.GA18575@test-lenovo>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20160520154111.GA18575@test-lenovo>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.24 (2015-08-30)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org


* Yu-cheng Yu <yu-cheng.yu@intel.com> wrote:

> On Fri, May 20, 2016 at 09:12:00AM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > Hm, the series does not apply cleanly:
> > 
> >  patching file arch/x86/include/asm/fpu/xstate.h
> >  patching file arch/x86/include/asm/processor.h
> >  patching file arch/x86/kernel/fpu/init.c
> >  patching file arch/x86/kernel/fpu/signal.c
> >  patching file arch/x86/kernel/fpu/xstate.c
> >  Hunk #4 FAILED at 552.
> >  1 out of 6 hunks FAILED -- rejects in file arch/x86/kernel/fpu/xstate.c
> > 
> > which suggests that this series isn't against a recent x86 tree, right?
> 
> That was based on the latest upstream kernel.  I also keep a version based
> on tip/master.  Would it work?

Yes, tip/master would be fine, or upstream bc231d9ede99 that has the x86 tree 
already merged.

Thanks,

	Ingo.