Re: [PATCH 0/4] ACPICA: Stable material of ACPI executer fixes forlinux-3.8.

[Greg Kroah-Hartman]

On Fri, Nov 01, 2013 at 02:58:16AM +0000, Zheng, Lv wrote:
> > From: Rafael J. Wysocki [mailto:rjw@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]
> > Sent: Thursday, October 31, 2013 8:22 PM
> > 
> > On Thursday, October 31, 2013 05:08:50 AM Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> > > On Thu, Oct 31, 2013 at 12:39:21PM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > > > On Thursday, October 31, 2013 09:07:40 AM Lv Zheng wrote:
> > > > > There are bug-fixes for AML interpreter upstreamed, fixing some serious
> > > > > issues found in recent platforms.  These fixes make Linux AML interpreter
> > > > > more ACPI 2.0 ASL concept compliant.  Further AML interpreter fixes should
> > > > > be based on such improvements, thus they are good materials for stable.
> > > > >
> > > > > This patch set can be safely applied to linux-3.8:
> > > > > commit 19f949f52599ba7c3f67a5897ac6be14bfcb1200 upstream.
> > > > >
> > > > > The patch set has passed build/boot tests on the following machines:
> > > > >   Dell Inspiron Mini 1010 (i386)
> > > > >   HP Compaq 8200 Elite SFF PC (x86-64)
> > > > >
> > > > > Bob Moore (4):
> > > > >   ACPICA: Interpreter: Fix Store() when implicit conversion is not
> > > > >     possible.
> > > > >   ACPICA: DeRefOf operator: Update to fully resolve FieldUnit and
> > > > >     BufferField refs.
> > > > >   ACPICA: Return error if DerefOf resolves to a null package element.
> > > > >   ACPICA: Fix for a Store->ArgX when ArgX contains a reference to a
> > > > >     field.
> > > >
> > > > Hi Greg,
> > > >
> > > > Please take patches [1-4/4] for stable.
> > >
> > > "Which" stable tree?
> > >
> > > I don't do 3.8, it's long been end-of-life, although one company is
> > > trying to keep it alive, but that's not me.
> > >
> > > I'm only handling 3.4, 3.10, and 3.11 stable trees right now, which
> > > one(s) should these be applied to?
> > 
> > 3.10.x and 3.11.x then.
> > 
> > Lv, do the original mainline commits apply to these kernels?
> > 
> > Rafael
> 
> Hi, Rafael and Greg
> 
> I checked the back port dependencies since v3.8:
> 1. [PATCH 1] belongs to v3.9.
> 2. [PATCH 4] includes an empty line belonging to a coding style fix affecting this series (between [PATCH 3] and [PATCH 4]).
> Thus,
> 1. For v3.10:
>     [PATCH 1]: It's already in the repo, so please drop it.
>     [PATCH 2-4]: They can be used directly as 3.10.x stable materials.
> 2. For v3.11:
>     [PATCH 1]: It's already in the repo, so please drop it.
>     [PATCH 2-3]: They can be used directly as 3.11.x stable materials.
>     [PATCH 4]: The original commit from Linus' tree should be used instead.
> 
>  I checked the commit log since v3.4.
>  There is no functional change done to the AML executer between v3.4 and v3.8.
>  The problem is there is a coding style fix affecting this series (between v3.4 and [PATCH 1]).
>  I generated the following diff block before applying [PATCH 1], and obtained a successful build/boot to a v3.4 kernel with these patches applied.
> Thus,
> 1. For v3.4:
>     [PATCH 1]: You can merge this diff block to [PATCH 1] or simply modify the [PATCH 1] by manually adding this white space.
>     [PATCH 2-4]: They can be used directly as 3.4.x stable materials.

Ok, I think I have this all properly queued up for 3.4, 3.10, and
3.11-stable trees, can you please check and verify I didn't mess
anything up?

thanks,

greg k-h
--
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/