Hello Sasha,
Thanks a lot for testing all these configurations (and I apologize if I missed anything to fulfill the process to contribute to -stable) I will check the configurations that fail and check if we just need to resolve the patch conflict(s). Should we mark the current patch as targeting v4.19+ and submit specific patches for < 4.19? Your guidance would be greatly appreciated
Thank you Cedric ________________________________________ From: Sasha Levin sashal@kernel.org Sent: Sunday, June 16, 2019 12:16 AM To: Sasha Levin; Hombourger, Cedric Cc: Hombourger, Cedric; linux-mips@vger.kernel.org; stable@vger.kernel.org; stable@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] MIPS: have "plain" make calls build dtbs for selected platforms
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: v5.1.9, v4.19.50, v4.14.125, v4.9.181, v4.4.181.
v5.1.9: Build OK! v4.19.50: Build OK! v4.14.125: Failed to apply! Possible dependencies: 04d8405e714e ("MIPS: Set defconfig target to a generic system for 32r2el")
v4.9.181: Failed to apply! Possible dependencies: 04d8405e714e ("MIPS: Set defconfig target to a generic system for 32r2el")
v4.4.181: Failed to apply! Possible dependencies: 04d8405e714e ("MIPS: Set defconfig target to a generic system for 32r2el") aadeec4df9b3 ("MIPS: tools: Build relocs tool")
How should we proceed with this patch?
-- Thanks, Sasha
Greetings,
Just to follow-up. I have verified that we can apply this patch to 4.4 and 4.9 without introducing additional patches but simply resolving conflicts. Should I post separate patches for 4.4 and 4.9?
Thank you Cedric ________________________________________ From: Hombourger, Cedric Sent: Sunday, June 16, 2019 8:58 AM To: Sasha Levin Cc: linux-mips@vger.kernel.org; stable@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] MIPS: have "plain" make calls build dtbs for selected platforms
Hello Sasha,
Thanks a lot for testing all these configurations (and I apologize if I missed anything to fulfill the process to contribute to -stable) I will check the configurations that fail and check if we just need to resolve the patch conflict(s). Should we mark the current patch as targeting v4.19+ and submit specific patches for < 4.19? Your guidance would be greatly appreciated
Thank you Cedric ________________________________________ From: Sasha Levin sashal@kernel.org Sent: Sunday, June 16, 2019 12:16 AM To: Sasha Levin; Hombourger, Cedric Cc: Hombourger, Cedric; linux-mips@vger.kernel.org; stable@vger.kernel.org; stable@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] MIPS: have "plain" make calls build dtbs for selected platforms
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: v5.1.9, v4.19.50, v4.14.125, v4.9.181, v4.4.181.
v5.1.9: Build OK! v4.19.50: Build OK! v4.14.125: Failed to apply! Possible dependencies: 04d8405e714e ("MIPS: Set defconfig target to a generic system for 32r2el")
v4.9.181: Failed to apply! Possible dependencies: 04d8405e714e ("MIPS: Set defconfig target to a generic system for 32r2el")
v4.4.181: Failed to apply! Possible dependencies: 04d8405e714e ("MIPS: Set defconfig target to a generic system for 32r2el") aadeec4df9b3 ("MIPS: tools: Build relocs tool")
How should we proceed with this patch?
-- Thanks, Sasha
Hi Cedric,
On Thu, Jun 20, 2019 at 08:01:46AM +0000, Hombourger, Cedric wrote:
Just to follow-up. I have verified that we can apply this patch to 4.4 and 4.9 without introducing additional patches but simply resolving conflicts. Should I post separate patches for 4.4 and 4.9?
Is the patch actually needed any earlier than v4.20?
Locally I've applied it to mips-fixes & tagged it with:
Fixes: d5615e472d23 ("builddeb: Fix inclusion of dtbs in debian package") Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org # v4.20+
It looks to me like prior to that commit this is unnecessary. If that's wrong please let me know.
Thanks, Paul
Hello Paul,
I will recheck tomorrow morning but the kernel I was initially working with was 4.19 and I did not find dtbs being compiled from a plain make or from builddeb
For what it’s worth, I was using the pistachio_defconfig.
My test workflow is as follows (ARCH and CROSS_COMPILE are set in my environment)
make mrproper make pistachio_defconfig make find arch/mips -name *.dtb
Cedric
On 20 Jun 2019, at 22:03, Paul Burton paul.burton@mips.com wrote:
Hi Cedric,
On Thu, Jun 20, 2019 at 08:01:46AM +0000, Hombourger, Cedric wrote: Just to follow-up. I have verified that we can apply this patch to 4.4 and 4.9 without introducing additional patches but simply resolving conflicts. Should I post separate patches for 4.4 and 4.9?
Is the patch actually needed any earlier than v4.20?
Locally I've applied it to mips-fixes & tagged it with:
Fixes: d5615e472d23 ("builddeb: Fix inclusion of dtbs in debian package") Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org # v4.20+
It looks to me like prior to that commit this is unnecessary. If that's wrong please let me know.
Thanks, Paul
Hi Cedric,
On Thu, Jun 20, 2019 at 09:12:26PM +0000, Hombourger, Cedric wrote:
Hello Paul,
I will recheck tomorrow morning but the kernel I was initially working with was 4.19 and I did not find dtbs being compiled from a plain make or from builddeb
Oh, sure - I don't expect they'd get built either. I did think builddeb would succeed without them though, but actually looking at history it would still fail for v4.1 through v4.19 because although builddeb checked for a dtbs_install target in the arch Makefile prior to the commit I mentioned before, we used to have one in those versions...
So I'll mark your commit for backport as far as v4.1 where our dtbs_install target was introduced.
The usual approach is that the patch goes into mainline first, and once that happens you can submit your backports for the stable branches where it doesn't apply cleanly. You should receive an email following the failed attempts to cherry-pick the commit onto the stable branches, which is often a good reminder to handle the backport.
(PS. Top posting is frowned upon pretty much universally in the kernel communify - I'd recommend switching your email reply style before it draws too much attention ;) )
Thanks, Paul
linux-stable-mirror@lists.linaro.org
-
Hombourger, Cedric -
Paul Burton