Hi Shasha,

On 23.01.19 23:57, 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: 2.6.26+

The bot has tested the following trees: v4.20.3, v4.19.16, v4.14.94, v4.9.151, v4.4.171, v3.18.132.

v4.20.3: Build OK! v4.19.16: Build OK! v4.14.94: Build OK! v4.9.151: Build OK! v4.4.171: Failed to apply! Possible dependencies: 2b5f5f5dc114 ("can: bcm: unify bcm_msg_head handling and prepare function parameters") 6f3b911d5f29 ("can: bcm: add support for CAN FD frames") 72c8a89ad2e4 ("can: bcm: use CAN frame instead of can_frame in comments") 95acb490ec51 ("can: bcm: fix indention and other minor style issues")

v3.18.132: Failed to apply! Possible dependencies: 069f8457ae52 ("can: fix spelling errors") 2b5f5f5dc114 ("can: bcm: unify bcm_msg_head handling and prepare function parameters") 6ce8e9ce5989 ("new helper: memcpy_from_msg()") 6f3b911d5f29 ("can: bcm: add support for CAN FD frames") 72c8a89ad2e4 ("can: bcm: use CAN frame instead of can_frame in comments") 95acb490ec51 ("can: bcm: fix indention and other minor style issues") ba61a8d9d780 ("can: avoid using timeval for uapi")

How should we proceed with this patch?

As we do have a proper upstream commit hash now ...

https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/mkl/linux-can.git/commit/?h=...

... here is the ported patch for kernels pre version 4.8:

https://marc.info/?l=linux-can&m=154832094402622&w=2

Thanks, Oliver

ps. the pull request to Dave is still hanging here:

https://marc.info/?l=linux-can&m=154831478900596&w=2