From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753353AbbAVT4j (ORCPT ); Thu, 22 Jan 2015 14:56:39 -0500 Received: from mail-ie0-f172.google.com ([209.85.223.172]:52601 "EHLO mail-ie0-f172.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752609AbbAVT4g (ORCPT ); Thu, 22 Jan 2015 14:56:36 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: References: Date: Fri, 23 Jan 2015 07:56:35 +1200 X-Google-Sender-Auth: yrpDXB77Syj4pybzdSCFTQiQdTg Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] x86: TLS regression fixes From: Linus Torvalds To: Andy Lutomirski Cc: "the arch/x86 maintainers" , Linux Kernel Mailing List Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Jan 23, 2015 at 7:27 AM, Andy Lutomirski wrote: > > Thoughts? Looks good to me. And since I curse at people who ignore regression reports because "it fixes a bug", I should take the time to say how much I liked seeing you explain to the people who reported this regression why it happened and what the thinking was. Now *that* is how things should work. "My bad, this was the background for why it seemed like a good idea". And I guess the second patch should also be marked for stable, since the thing that causes problems got backported too. Linus