On (Tue) 12 Aug 2014 [13:55:48], Greg KH wrote:

On Tue, Aug 12, 2014 at 11:01:58AM +0530, Amit Shah wrote:

quoted

On (Tue) 12 Aug 2014 [06:55:27], Greg KH wrote:

quoted

On Mon, Aug 11, 2014 at 06:11:47PM +0530, Amit Shah wrote:

quoted

This is a 3.16-only patch.  The linux.git fix is
5c06273401f2eb7b290cadbae18ee00f8f65e893, which fixes this issue in a
different way.

Why "different"?  Why can't I take that original patch instead?  What is
different in this patch, and why?

The commit referenced moves the hwrng_register() call to the ->scan()
callback instead of it being in probe().  This was done to ensure the
virtio-rng devices can contribute to the initial system entropy
introduced in commit d9e7972619334.

That patch is quite small too, but will need a slight conflict
resolution due to the previous two code-shuffling patches, and also
the following revert.

However, I decided against the backport of the ->scan() method, since
it wasn't designed to solve this regression, it happens to solve it,
and it actually introduces new functionality.  I would be happy to
provide a backport of the relevant patches, if you think that would be
alright.

I almost always want "original" patches as it causes less bugs overall,
and less confusion for everyone involved.  Taking 2-3 patches is just as
easy as 1 patch, and even easier if I don't have to review it as "hard"
due to it not differing from what is in Linus's tree.

Thanks; I'll send a backport of the patches, then.

		Amit