From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail.skyhub.de (mail.skyhub.de [5.9.137.197]) by ml01.01.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8CAB221959D3E for ; Wed, 10 May 2017 14:57:18 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 10 May 2017 23:57:07 +0200 From: Borislav Petkov Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] x86/MCE: Export memory_error() Message-ID: <20170510215707.v7zywrslma4o7jao@pd.tnic> References: <20170421202741.GA16423@intel.com> <20170421210704.c5pvpn6zivvruzx3@pd.tnic> <20170424113620.6iq2466yhkhb33rp@pd.tnic> <20170425210740.GA15722@omniknight.lm.intel.com> <1494444606.20330.2.camel@intel.com> <20170510200406.mphusoidfuyq24ee@pd.tnic> <1494446729.20330.4.camel@intel.com> <20170510200851.mhz3434jauxdq2u5@pd.tnic> <1494450649.20330.6.camel@intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1494450649.20330.6.camel@intel.com> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: linux-nvdimm-bounces@lists.01.org Sender: "Linux-nvdimm" To: "Verma, Vishal L" Cc: "linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org" , "Luck," Tony" , "stable@vger.kernel.org, " , linux-nvdimm@lists.01.org" List-ID: On Wed, May 10, 2017 at 09:12:12PM +0000, Verma, Vishal L wrote: > The memory error check in the nfit handler is a valid, and simple fix. I need the big picture here: "Without this fix, the nfit handler ...". Then, if the stable rules apply, we can always expedite it through urgent/stable. -- Regards/Gruss, Boris. Good mailing practices for 400: avoid top-posting and trim the reply. _______________________________________________ Linux-nvdimm mailing list Linux-nvdimm@lists.01.org https://lists.01.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-nvdimm From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Borislav Petkov Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] x86/MCE: Export memory_error() Date: Wed, 10 May 2017 23:57:07 +0200 Message-ID: <20170510215707.v7zywrslma4o7jao@pd.tnic> References: <20170421202741.GA16423@intel.com> <20170421210704.c5pvpn6zivvruzx3@pd.tnic> <20170424113620.6iq2466yhkhb33rp@pd.tnic> <20170425210740.GA15722@omniknight.lm.intel.com> <1494444606.20330.2.camel@intel.com> <20170510200406.mphusoidfuyq24ee@pd.tnic> <1494446729.20330.4.camel@intel.com> <20170510200851.mhz3434jauxdq2u5@pd.tnic> <1494450649.20330.6.camel@intel.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Return-path: Received: from mail.skyhub.de ([5.9.137.197]:38146 "EHLO mail.skyhub.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754181AbdEJV5U (ORCPT ); Wed, 10 May 2017 17:57:20 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1494450649.20330.6.camel@intel.com> Sender: linux-acpi-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org To: "Verma, Vishal L" Cc: "Luck, Tony" , "linux-nvdimm@lists.01.org" , "stable@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org" On Wed, May 10, 2017 at 09:12:12PM +0000, Verma, Vishal L wrote: > The memory error check in the nfit handler is a valid, and simple fix. I need the big picture here: "Without this fix, the nfit handler ...". Then, if the stable rules apply, we can always expedite it through urgent/stable. -- Regards/Gruss, Boris. Good mailing practices for 400: avoid top-posting and trim the reply.