Hi,

On 05-02-19 19:52, Sasha Levin wrote:

Hi,

[This is an automated email]

This commit has been processed because it contains a -stable tag. The stable tag indicates that it's relevant for the following trees: all

The bot has tested the following trees: v4.20.6, v4.19.19, v4.14.97, v4.9.154, v4.4.172, v3.18.133.

v4.20.6: Build OK! v4.19.19: Build OK! v4.14.97: Failed to apply! Possible dependencies: 410b5c7b4836 ("libata: blacklist SAMSUNG MZ7TD256HAFV-000L9 SSD") 76936e9a6df1 ("libata: Apply NOLPM quirk for SAMSUNG PM830 CXM13D1Q.") a435ab4f80f9 ("libata: Apply NOLPM quirk for SAMSUNG MZ7TD256HAFV-000L9") b5b4d3a52c8f ("libata: Apply NOLPM quirk for SAMSUNG MZMPC128HBFU-000MV SSD")

The code to enable LPM support by default on mobile chipsets was merged in the 4.16 kernel, so 4.14 (and older) don't need these blacklist patches since they don't enable LPM by default (the user needs to write to a sysfs attribute to enable it).

So it is fine to leave this patch out of 4.14.z and older.

Regards,

Hans

v4.9.154: Failed to apply! Possible dependencies: 410b5c7b4836 ("libata: blacklist SAMSUNG MZ7TD256HAFV-000L9 SSD") 76936e9a6df1 ("libata: Apply NOLPM quirk for SAMSUNG PM830 CXM13D1Q.") a435ab4f80f9 ("libata: Apply NOLPM quirk for SAMSUNG MZ7TD256HAFV-000L9") b5b4d3a52c8f ("libata: Apply NOLPM quirk for SAMSUNG MZMPC128HBFU-000MV SSD")

v4.4.172: Failed to apply! Possible dependencies: 410b5c7b4836 ("libata: blacklist SAMSUNG MZ7TD256HAFV-000L9 SSD") 76936e9a6df1 ("libata: Apply NOLPM quirk for SAMSUNG PM830 CXM13D1Q.") a435ab4f80f9 ("libata: Apply NOLPM quirk for SAMSUNG MZ7TD256HAFV-000L9") b5b4d3a52c8f ("libata: Apply NOLPM quirk for SAMSUNG MZMPC128HBFU-000MV SSD")

v3.18.133: Failed to apply! Possible dependencies: 410b5c7b4836 ("libata: blacklist SAMSUNG MZ7TD256HAFV-000L9 SSD") 76936e9a6df1 ("libata: Apply NOLPM quirk for SAMSUNG PM830 CXM13D1Q.") a435ab4f80f9 ("libata: Apply NOLPM quirk for SAMSUNG MZ7TD256HAFV-000L9") b5b4d3a52c8f ("libata: Apply NOLPM quirk for SAMSUNG MZMPC128HBFU-000MV SSD")

How should we proceed with this patch?

-- Thanks, Sasha