[linux-yocto] [PATCH 0/1] a fix for v3.10 LTSI branch

[Kamble, Nitin A]

On 3/31/2014 2:01 PM, Hart, Darren wrote:
> On 3/31/14, 13:56, "Kamble, Nitin A" <nitin.a.kamble at intel.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: Hart, Darren
>>> Sent: Monday, March 31, 2014 1:34 PM
>>> To: Kamble, Nitin A; Ashfield, Bruce (Wind River); linux-
>>> yocto at yoctoproject.org
>>> Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/1] a fix for v3.10 LTSI branch
>>>
>>> On 3/31/14, 13:24, "Kamble, Nitin A" <nitin.a.kamble at intel.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> From: Nitin A Kamble <nitin.a.kamble at intel.com>
>>>>
>>>> I was noticing emenlow BSP failing to boot since LTSI was integrated in
>>>> the v3.10 kernel. After debugging I found out that kernel code was
>>>> doing an invalid memory access, causing kernel panic.
>>>>   Here is the fix for the issue, which I am also pushing to the
>>>> upstream
>>>> v3.10 LTSI kernel repository.
>>> Is this a backport from mainline? If so, it needs the cherry-pick ID.
>>> If not, this
>>> needs to go upstream first and then back to 3.10 stable (which LTSI
>>> will pick
>>> up). If neither of these seems like the right approach to you - what
>>> did you
>>> have in mind and why?
>> This is not a backport. But I am planning to send it to LTSI upstream. As
>> you say
>> this will be back ported, once it goes upstream in the LTSI repo.
> Please do not send it to LTSI. LTSI is not a development target. LTSI
> tracks stable and gets new features *from mainline* that stable cannot.
>
> Please send this to lkml with the stable line included (see the
> stable-kernel-rules.txt). This should get picked up into the LTSI release
> as a matter of course after it lands in 3.10 stable.

Got it. I pulled the trigger for LTSI ML too fast then. I will post it 
on LKML for 3.10 stable now.
Thanks for the clarification.

Nitin

>