Re: [tip:x86/urgent] x86/irqflags: Provide a declaration for native_save_fl
On Tue, 7 Aug 2018, Nick Desaulniers wrote: > On Tue, Aug 7, 2018 at 12:29 AM Thomas Gleixner wrote: > > On Mon, 6 Aug 2018, Nick Desaulniers wrote: > > > also, there were tested by's reported: > > > > > > Tested-by: David Laight > > > Tested-by: Sedat Dilek > > > > Which came in after I applied it > > I've seen other maintainers revise commit messages before sending pull > requests along, but I guess that's problematic as anyone else who has > pulled before the revision would then have a merge conflict. In general I avoid redoing commits for that reason and others and one of the reasons why we have the Link: tag in the commit message is to be able to look up such additional information easily - assumed that the archives have not vanished from the planet. Thanks, tglx
Re: [tip:x86/urgent] x86/irqflags: Provide a declaration for native_save_fl
On Tue, 7 Aug 2018, Nick Desaulniers wrote: > On Tue, Aug 7, 2018 at 12:29 AM Thomas Gleixner wrote: > > On Mon, 6 Aug 2018, Nick Desaulniers wrote: > > > also, there were tested by's reported: > > > > > > Tested-by: David Laight > > > Tested-by: Sedat Dilek > > > > Which came in after I applied it > > I've seen other maintainers revise commit messages before sending pull > requests along, but I guess that's problematic as anyone else who has > pulled before the revision would then have a merge conflict. In general I avoid redoing commits for that reason and others and one of the reasons why we have the Link: tag in the commit message is to be able to look up such additional information easily - assumed that the archives have not vanished from the planet. Thanks, tglx
Re: [tip:x86/urgent] x86/irqflags: Provide a declaration for native_save_fl
On Tue, Aug 7, 2018 at 12:29 AM Thomas Gleixner wrote: > > On Mon, 6 Aug 2018, Nick Desaulniers wrote: > > On Sun, Aug 5, 2018 at 1:33 PM tip-bot for Nick Desaulniers > > wrote: > > > Cc: sta...@vger.kernel.org > > > > Not sure if this was going to be cleaned up in an automated way, but > > looks like this commit message drops the comment to stable as to how > > far back it should go: > > > > # 4.17, 4.14, 4.9, 4.4 > > The Fixes tag is enough. If the upstream commit was backported, then the > tools of the stable folks will find it and know exactly how far it needs to > go back. Oh, cool. > > also, there were tested by's reported: > > > > Tested-by: David Laight > > Tested-by: Sedat Dilek > > Which came in after I applied it I've seen other maintainers revise commit messages before sending pull requests along, but I guess that's problematic as anyone else who has pulled before the revision would then have a merge conflict. -- Thanks, ~Nick Desaulniers
Re: [tip:x86/urgent] x86/irqflags: Provide a declaration for native_save_fl
On Tue, Aug 7, 2018 at 12:29 AM Thomas Gleixner wrote: > > On Mon, 6 Aug 2018, Nick Desaulniers wrote: > > On Sun, Aug 5, 2018 at 1:33 PM tip-bot for Nick Desaulniers > > wrote: > > > Cc: sta...@vger.kernel.org > > > > Not sure if this was going to be cleaned up in an automated way, but > > looks like this commit message drops the comment to stable as to how > > far back it should go: > > > > # 4.17, 4.14, 4.9, 4.4 > > The Fixes tag is enough. If the upstream commit was backported, then the > tools of the stable folks will find it and know exactly how far it needs to > go back. Oh, cool. > > also, there were tested by's reported: > > > > Tested-by: David Laight > > Tested-by: Sedat Dilek > > Which came in after I applied it I've seen other maintainers revise commit messages before sending pull requests along, but I guess that's problematic as anyone else who has pulled before the revision would then have a merge conflict. -- Thanks, ~Nick Desaulniers
Re: [tip:x86/urgent] x86/irqflags: Provide a declaration for native_save_fl
On Mon, 6 Aug 2018, Nick Desaulniers wrote: > On Sun, Aug 5, 2018 at 1:33 PM tip-bot for Nick Desaulniers > wrote: > > Cc: sta...@vger.kernel.org > > Not sure if this was going to be cleaned up in an automated way, but > looks like this commit message drops the comment to stable as to how > far back it should go: > > # 4.17, 4.14, 4.9, 4.4 The Fixes tag is enough. If the upstream commit was backported, then the tools of the stable folks will find it and know exactly how far it needs to go back. > also, there were tested by's reported: > > Tested-by: David Laight > Tested-by: Sedat Dilek Which came in after I applied it Thanks, tglx
Re: [tip:x86/urgent] x86/irqflags: Provide a declaration for native_save_fl
On Mon, 6 Aug 2018, Nick Desaulniers wrote: > On Sun, Aug 5, 2018 at 1:33 PM tip-bot for Nick Desaulniers > wrote: > > Cc: sta...@vger.kernel.org > > Not sure if this was going to be cleaned up in an automated way, but > looks like this commit message drops the comment to stable as to how > far back it should go: > > # 4.17, 4.14, 4.9, 4.4 The Fixes tag is enough. If the upstream commit was backported, then the tools of the stable folks will find it and know exactly how far it needs to go back. > also, there were tested by's reported: > > Tested-by: David Laight > Tested-by: Sedat Dilek Which came in after I applied it Thanks, tglx
Re: [tip:x86/urgent] x86/irqflags: Provide a declaration for native_save_fl
On Sun, Aug 5, 2018 at 1:33 PM tip-bot for Nick Desaulniers
wrote:
>
> Commit-ID: 208cbb32558907f68b3b2a081ca2337ac3744794
> Gitweb:
> https://git.kernel.org/tip/208cbb32558907f68b3b2a081ca2337ac3744794
> Author: Nick Desaulniers
> AuthorDate: Fri, 3 Aug 2018 10:05:50 -0700
> Committer: Thomas Gleixner
> CommitDate: Sun, 5 Aug 2018 22:30:37 +0200
>
> x86/irqflags: Provide a declaration for native_save_fl
>
> It was reported that the commit d0a8d9378d16 is causing users of gcc < 4.9
> to observe -Werror=missing-prototypes errors.
>
> Indeed, it seems that:
> extern inline unsigned long native_save_fl(void) { return 0; }
>
> compiled with -Werror=missing-prototypes produces this warning in gcc <
> 4.9, but not gcc >= 4.9.
>
> Fixes: d0a8d9378d16 ("x86/paravirt: Make native_save_fl() extern inline").
> Reported-by: David Laight
> Reported-by: Jean Delvare
> Signed-off-by: Nick Desaulniers
> Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner
> Cc: h...@zytor.com
> Cc: jgr...@suse.com
> Cc: kstew...@linuxfoundation.org
> Cc: gre...@linuxfoundation.org
> Cc: boris.ostrov...@oracle.com
> Cc: astrac...@google.com
> Cc: m...@chromium.org
> Cc: a...@arndb.de
> Cc: tstel...@redhat.com
> Cc: sedat.di...@gmail.com
> Cc: david.lai...@aculab.com
> Cc: sta...@vger.kernel.org
Not sure if this was going to be cleaned up in an automated way, but
looks like this commit message drops the comment to stable as to how
far back it should go:
# 4.17, 4.14, 4.9, 4.4
also, there were tested by's reported:
Tested-by: David Laight
Tested-by: Sedat Dilek
--
Thanks,
~Nick Desaulniers
Re: [tip:x86/urgent] x86/irqflags: Provide a declaration for native_save_fl
On Sun, Aug 5, 2018 at 1:33 PM tip-bot for Nick Desaulniers
wrote:
>
> Commit-ID: 208cbb32558907f68b3b2a081ca2337ac3744794
> Gitweb:
> https://git.kernel.org/tip/208cbb32558907f68b3b2a081ca2337ac3744794
> Author: Nick Desaulniers
> AuthorDate: Fri, 3 Aug 2018 10:05:50 -0700
> Committer: Thomas Gleixner
> CommitDate: Sun, 5 Aug 2018 22:30:37 +0200
>
> x86/irqflags: Provide a declaration for native_save_fl
>
> It was reported that the commit d0a8d9378d16 is causing users of gcc < 4.9
> to observe -Werror=missing-prototypes errors.
>
> Indeed, it seems that:
> extern inline unsigned long native_save_fl(void) { return 0; }
>
> compiled with -Werror=missing-prototypes produces this warning in gcc <
> 4.9, but not gcc >= 4.9.
>
> Fixes: d0a8d9378d16 ("x86/paravirt: Make native_save_fl() extern inline").
> Reported-by: David Laight
> Reported-by: Jean Delvare
> Signed-off-by: Nick Desaulniers
> Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner
> Cc: h...@zytor.com
> Cc: jgr...@suse.com
> Cc: kstew...@linuxfoundation.org
> Cc: gre...@linuxfoundation.org
> Cc: boris.ostrov...@oracle.com
> Cc: astrac...@google.com
> Cc: m...@chromium.org
> Cc: a...@arndb.de
> Cc: tstel...@redhat.com
> Cc: sedat.di...@gmail.com
> Cc: david.lai...@aculab.com
> Cc: sta...@vger.kernel.org
Not sure if this was going to be cleaned up in an automated way, but
looks like this commit message drops the comment to stable as to how
far back it should go:
# 4.17, 4.14, 4.9, 4.4
also, there were tested by's reported:
Tested-by: David Laight
Tested-by: Sedat Dilek
--
Thanks,
~Nick Desaulniers
