From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1759431Ab2DZWGm (ORCPT ); Thu, 26 Apr 2012 18:06:42 -0400 Received: from ogre.sisk.pl ([193.178.161.156]:39944 "EHLO ogre.sisk.pl" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1758866Ab2DZWGk (ORCPT ); Thu, 26 Apr 2012 18:06:40 -0400 From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" To: Bojan Smojver Subject: Re: [PATCH v11]: Hibernation: fix the number of pages used for hibernate/thaw buffering Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2012 00:11:20 +0200 User-Agent: KMail/1.13.6 (Linux/3.4.0-rc4+; KDE/4.6.0; x86_64; ; ) Cc: Per Olofsson , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Linux PM list References: <1334267969.2573.14.camel@shrek.rexursive.com> <201204262200.32663.rjw@sisk.pl> <1335474828.2136.15.camel@shrek.rexursive.com> In-Reply-To: <1335474828.2136.15.camel@shrek.rexursive.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <201204270011.20430.rjw@sisk.pl> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thursday, April 26, 2012, Bojan Smojver wrote: > On Thu, 2012-04-26 at 22:00 +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > > No, I didn't requested that. There's nothing like stable-only patches, > > we only backport mainline commits to -stable. > > Yeah, you told me that my patch was not straightforward, so I broke off > part of it for -stable that would fix just the most critical problem. Which is entirely OK, but see below. > > > This patch should go to linux-next: > > > > > > http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=133426808115262&w=2 > > > > OK > > > > So I'll include it into my v3.5 push and I don't want to hear about how > > urgent it is any more. Is that clear enough? > > Look, I created a problem on some people's computer in 3.2. I feel > responsible for fixing it. I do not want their computers to hang because > of something I wrote, especially if there is a fix. > > So, if I will say one more time. This patch is a fix for a regression, > caused by me, since 3.2. Please ask -stable maintainers to include it in > version in 3.2 and above. The -stable rules are such that it only is permitted to put a commit into -stable if the analogous commit is already in the mainline. That also covers reverts and such. > If you want me to create a set of patches instead and then you backport > just one, let me know. I will do whatever is necessary to fix this > regression. Can you just create a second patch on top of what's in linux-next now? Rafael