ACK: [SRU][Trusty][lts-backport-utopic][PATCH 0/2] powerpc/tm: Fixes for LP:1520411

[Tim Gardner]

On 12/11/2015 03:57 PM, Joseph Salisbury wrote:
> On 12/11/2015 04:41 PM, Tim Gardner wrote:
>> I'm a little confused about why these patches weren't in the X/W/V
>> series if they are also cherry picks.
>>
>>
> I sent the Trusty and lts-backport-utopic patches separate from X/W/V
> because the patch 1/1 is slightly different between the two in
> restore_tm_user_regs().  For example:
> 
> ### In Trusty and lts-backport-utpoic ###
> @@ -883,11 +892,6 @@ static long restore_tm_user_regs(struct pt_regs *regs,
>         tm_enable();
>         /* This loads the checkpointed FP/VEC state, if used */
>         tm_recheckpoint(&current->thread, msr);
> -       /* Get the top half of the MSR */
> ######
> 
> versus
> 
> ### In X/W/V ###
> @@ -884,11 +893,6 @@ static long restore_tm_user_regs(struct pt_regs *regs,
>         current->thread.tm_texasr |= TEXASR_FS;
>         /* This loads the checkpointed FP/VEC state, if used */
>         tm_recheckpoint(&current->thread, msr);
> -       /* Get the top half of the MSR */
> ######
> 
> 
> The commit cherry picks cleanly in each release.  However if a "git am"
> was performed with the X/W/V patches against Trusty or
> lts-backport-utopic, it would fail.
> 
> If that is ok, I'll not split them out anymore in the future.
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Joe
> 
> 
> 

Nope, what you did seems reasonable.

-- 
Tim Gardner tim.gardner at canonical.com