Re: [PATCH 3.10.y+] PM / sleep: Use valid_state() for platform-dependent sleep states only
From: Francis Moreau
Date: Fri Sep 05 2014 - 10:50:16 EST
On 09/05/2014 09:45 AM, Brian Norris wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 05, 2014 at 08:29:09AM +0200, Francis Moreau wrote:
>> On 09/04/2014 11:21 PM, Brian Norris wrote:
>>> Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@xxxxxxxxx>
>>> Cc: <stable@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> # 3.10+: 27ddcc6596e5: PM / sleep: Add state field to pm_states entries
>>> Cc: <stable@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> # 3.10+
>>> This is a backport request for these two commits upstream:
>>> 27ddcc6596e5 PM / sleep: Add state field to pm_states entries
>>> 43e8317b0bba PM / sleep: Use valid_state() for platform-dependent sleep states only
>> Wouldn't it be cleaner to have 2 separate backports then ?
> The first is purely a dependency for the second. It has no value on its
> own. So I thought the above form made sense and followed the process
> mentioned in Documentation/stable_kernel_rules.txt.
> Admittedly, it's a little asymmetric. But I really don't know what the
> "best" option is, since I'd prefer not having to send around any patch
> text at all, unless the backport is not trivial (these apply cleanly).
I don't know, I just find cleaner to cherry-pick upstream commits when
possible so I can retrieve them easily later when inspecting a stable
My 2 cents.
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/