I thought the same thing that John wrote -- I only need re@ approval for MFC's during the release process.
I know it's unusually fast to have an MFC period of 1 day, but this change could fix a kernel panic when r344062 is MFC'd and doesn't result in a functional change to the driver, so I didn't think there was a reason for it to sit longer. - Eric On Thu, Feb 14, 2019 at 11:28 AM John Baldwin <j...@freebsd.org> wrote: > On 2/14/19 10:22 AM, Rodney W. Grimes wrote: > >> Author: erj > >> Date: Thu Feb 14 18:02:37 2019 > >> New Revision: 344132 > >> URL: https://svnweb.freebsd.org/changeset/base/344132 > >> > >> Log: > >> ixl: Fix panic caused by bug exposed by r344062 > >> > >> Don't use a struct if_irq for IFLIB_INTR_IOV type interrupts since > that results > >> in get_core_offset() being called on them, and get_core_offset() > doesn't > >> handle IFLIB_INTR_IOV type interrupts, which results in an assert() > being triggered > >> in iflib_irq_set_affinity(). > >> > >> PR: 235730 > >> Reported by: Jeffrey Pieper <jeffrey.e.pie...@intel.com> > >> MFC after: 1 day > > > > Normally you would request an RE@ approval for a fast track to stable, > > consider this message such an approval. > > That does not match our historical practice over the past 20 years. If we > want to change that practice, that's a topic we can debate, but re@ has > only required oversight on MFC's during slushes/freezes with the additional > caveat of perhaps watching out for ABI breakage at any time (and requiring > approvals for a known ABI breakage on a branch). > > -- > John Baldwin > > > > _______________________________________________ svn-src-head@freebsd.org mailing list https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/svn-src-head To unsubscribe, send any mail to "svn-src-head-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
