From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.9 required=3.0 tests=DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A2BF4C43331 for ; Sat, 7 Sep 2019 00:59:05 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6C25A208C3 for ; Sat, 7 Sep 2019 00:59:05 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=default; t=1567817945; bh=UMDYgnxp3GRCRmVhNbIrX7MDdX/vY3f+PdMjj4NEFdE=; h=References:In-Reply-To:From:Date:Subject:To:Cc:List-ID:From; b=2PAL4KocIW79D6RTo5/M9jR4hmj4jb1eFI2id6rzj7LxAT4oLsYOn30WSM3C1bOUC ehYP/1CabgwTAVtoSI9kofO80RZFyJbIn142igsaNizxfdnpPJ84jwkWjckUrGO0Ub J/HCCwCXresaSQwcbEfk4yNqTBvj+8BvzWvdYvv0= Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S2393695AbfIGA7E (ORCPT ); Fri, 6 Sep 2019 20:59:04 -0400 Received: from mail-lf1-f67.google.com ([209.85.167.67]:40016 "EHLO mail-lf1-f67.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S2393395AbfIGA7E (ORCPT ); Fri, 6 Sep 2019 20:59:04 -0400 Received: by mail-lf1-f67.google.com with SMTP id u29so6433425lfk.7 for ; Fri, 06 Sep 2019 17:59:02 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linux-foundation.org; s=google; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=8kIgqDMkFTwayvksrS5XNZf9m8Rh0h1cv78i3UXEbJI=; b=UzgJfyFPXKrT2RfymPeUESR/PTDrIQ6zjcAAqtzEsY/l6Z0RvXCSYMqyGTmMRe2lfk 802GnJTSRxtczCYfICGArDe1W834IMuCpm6ELnZD3/LuJ25fNG1vsprh/mk23dxdZ/fl hA0RXX4iAKQJUE3fmV7aWUWNPwEhg1ppDW85Y= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=8kIgqDMkFTwayvksrS5XNZf9m8Rh0h1cv78i3UXEbJI=; b=JjovNePaR8HQG1ktwZq6v3mybkPmzZVmeHUYpCi9wsQKk/YfCfXE0GtxlL6Id/UUNR a5xG+BRbeMjtPEdsXFMfi3/N41Gm7ws4Pzle48QwKlqXgE15voTwLXxLsqOw/eXvA5RY 8rRU+CMktZturU+U2vgAJQ5x21LYp3RjQuof1KLoVpbJZpoHE1ASJCh/Lf0Pwn3c/l82 VMKW14lhz0AzcLH4QIyOsRSBSKPQi/MTBS9EUeFPqs5tmqpzh4+gwzqIpBa0JB25PBQI ZKyLloCzE07BBYUR0QWp1P5s0b9aTePwOEdJsVr/L+sYoRW3rX57mqcKMXUPAncNbeEC 1/BA== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAUTmXGdur0RKNbidGN9qOpTTry1OIrKmUGWGIjEG6mh/LvVECzg 3pXX003CUM6zRC/1K+GMlXYW4rk64Ds= X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqyqazbCRiNbem+zlnoEkfPUvXrtiLi2vpWNYkz0aYPXj76R1CuCGxd8Ce/4DV96U4XvLpLgFA== X-Received: by 2002:ac2:4257:: with SMTP id m23mr8180355lfl.6.1567817941373; Fri, 06 Sep 2019 17:59:01 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-lf1-f42.google.com (mail-lf1-f42.google.com. [209.85.167.42]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id r75sm1409015lff.7.2019.09.06.17.59.00 for (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Fri, 06 Sep 2019 17:59:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-lf1-f42.google.com with SMTP id z21so6476727lfe.1 for ; Fri, 06 Sep 2019 17:59:00 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 2002:ac2:5c11:: with SMTP id r17mr8411029lfp.61.1567817939765; Fri, 06 Sep 2019 17:58:59 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20190904181740.GA19688@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: From: Linus Torvalds Date: Fri, 6 Sep 2019 17:58:43 -0700 X-Gmail-Original-Message-ID: Message-ID: Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] compiler-attributes for v5.3-rc8 To: Nick Desaulniers Cc: Miguel Ojeda , Will Deacon , Josh Poimboeuf , "Naveen N. Rao" , "David S. Miller" , Paul Burton , Sedat Dilek , Linux List Kernel Mailing , Behan Webster , Behan Webster Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Sep 6, 2019 at 5:45 PM Nick Desaulniers wrote: > > > Yes. With the appropriate test cycle > > Sedat reported the issue and already tested/verified the fix. How > long should it sit in -next before sending a PR for inclusion to 5.3 > (as opposed to letting it ride out to 5.4)? If the original patch was already in -next, I wouldn't worry about it, as long as you do enough local testing that there's nothing stupid going on. The -next cycle is a few days, and even with an rc8 we're getting close enough to release that I'd rather get it earlier than later. So I'd rather get a pull request this weekend than then have to deal with it when traveling next week. Linus