Re: [PATCH v9 00/36] x86: enable FRED for x86-64

[Sean Christopherson <seanjc@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On Mon, Jul 31, 2023, Xin3 Li wrote:
> > > This patch set enables the Intel flexible return and event delivery
> > > (FRED) architecture for x86-64.
> > 
> > ...
> > 
> > > --
> > > 2.34.1
> > 
> > What is this based on?
> 
> The tip tree master branch.
> 
> > FYI, you're using a version of git that will (mostly)
> > automatically generate the based, e.g. I do
> > 
> >   git format-patch --base=HEAD~$nr ...
> > 
> > in my scripts, where $nr is the number of patches I am sending.  My specific
> > approaches requires HEAD-$nr to be a publicly visible object/commit, but 
> > that
> > should be the case the vast majority of the time anyways.
> 
> Are you talking about that you only got a subset of this patch set?

No, I'm saying I don't want to waste a bunch of time tracking down exactly which
commit a 36 patch series is based on.  E.g. I just refreshed tip/master and 
still
get:

Applying: x86/idtentry: Incorporate definitions/declarations of the FRED 
external interrupt handler type
error: sha1 information is lacking or useless (arch/x86/include/asm/idtentry.h).
error: could not build fake ancestor
Patch failed at 0024 x86/idtentry: Incorporate definitions/declarations of the 
FRED external interrupt handler type
hint: Use 'git am --show-current-patch=diff' to see the failed patch

> HPA told me he only got patches 0-25/36.
> 
> And I got several undeliverable email notifications, saying
> "
> The following message to <tglx@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> was undeliverable.
> The reason for the problem:
> 5.x.1 - Maximum number of delivery attempts exceeded. [Default] 450-'4.7.25 
> Client host rejected: cannot find your hostname, [134.134.136.31]'
> "
> 
> I guess there were some problems with the Intel mail system last night,
> probably I should resend this patch set later.

Yes, lore also appears to be missing patches.  I grabbed the mbox off of KVM's
patchwork instance.