On Wed, 30 Mar 2022 at 19:11, Palmer Dabbelt <pal...@dabbelt.com> wrote: > > > Presumably you mean "revert" here? That might be the right way to go, > just to avoid breaking users (even if we fix the kernel bug, it'll take > a while to get everyone to update). That said, this smells like the > sort of thing that's going to crop up at arbitrary times in dynamic > systems so while a revert looks like it'd work around the boot issue we > might be making more headaches for folks down the road. >
The opposite in fact, I did not suggest to revert it, but rather undo the revert (as Alistair already removed it from the apply-next tree), since my original patch fixes buggy behaviour that is blocking the testing of some embedded software on QEMU. Idan Horowitz
