On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 01:30:46PM -0300, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
> On Wed, 15 Aug 2012, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> > On Tue, Aug 14, 2012 at 09:26:54PM -0300, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
> > > I believe the patch bellow, which was required on 3.2, will also be
> > > necessary.
>
On Wed, 15 Aug 2012, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 14, 2012 at 09:26:54PM -0300, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
> > I believe the patch bellow, which was required on 3.2, will also be
> > necessary.
>
> Will it be necessary to apply this before this patch goes in the series,
> or aft
On Tue, Aug 14, 2012 at 09:26:54PM -0300, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
> I believe the patch bellow, which was required on 3.2, will also be
> necessary.
Will it be necessary to apply this before this patch goes in the series,
or after it?
thanks,
greg k-h
--
To unsubscribe from this list:
I believe the patch bellow, which was required on 3.2, will also be
necessary.
From: Kevin Winchester
Subject: [PATCH] x86: Simplify code by removing a !SMP #ifdefs from 'struct
cpuinfo_x86'
commit 141168c36cdee3ff23d9c7700b0edc47cb65479f and
commit 3f806e50981825fa56a7f1938f24c0680816be45 upst
From: Greg KH
3.0-stable review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let me know.
--
From: Borislav Petkov
commit c9fc3f778a6a215ace14ee556067c73982b6d40f upstream.
Microcode reloading in a per-core manner is a very bad idea for both
major x86 vendors. And the thing i
