On Thu, 22 Sept 2022 at 04:15, Huacai Chen <chenhuacai@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Wed, Sep 21, 2022 at 4:15 PM Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > On Wed, 21 Sept 2022 at 06:02, Huacai Chen <chenhuacai@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > > Acked-by: Huacai Chen <chenhuacai@xxxxxxxxxxx> > > > > > > > Thank you Huacai > > > > I have created a separate tag with these patches applied onto the > > first loongarch efi enablement patch (see below) > > > > I would prefer to keep the loongarch trees separate for the next merge > > window, but if needed to avoid massive conflicts, you could merge the > > tag into the loongarch tree and rebase your changes on top. But please > > take care not to rebase those patches themselves: the commit SHAs need > > to remain the same. > > > > However, if the conflicts are only minor, you can just explain in your > > PR to Linus what the resolution should look like. > > > > The tag can be found here: > > https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/efi/efi.git/tag/?h=efi-loongarch-for-v6.1-2 > > > > I have merged this into the EFI tree as well and pushed it out; it > > should appear in -next tomorrow. > > > > > > > > b093dc55ba9a efi/loongarch: libstub: remove dependency on flattened DT > > 102faf0747c2 efi: libstub: install boot-time memory map as config table > > 7318926e7bc9 efi: libstub: remove DT dependency from generic stub > > 7cb6671e3caa efi: libstub: unify initrd loading between architectures I will have to respin the initrd patch, unfortunately, as it breaks x86. So the signed tag will be updated, and the SHAs above will change as well. > > 1add08ceb15b efi: libstub: remove pointless goto kludge > > d2130a9cf0f7 efi: libstub: simplify efi_get_memory_map() and struct > > efi_boot_memmap > > bc5853aa56de efi: libstub: avoid efi_get_memory_map() for allocating > > the virt map > > d80ca810f096 efi: libstub: drop pointless get_memory_map() call > > ead384d95634 (tag: efi-loongarch-for-v6.1) efi/loongarch: Add efistub > > booting support > > 568035b01cfb (tag: v6.0-rc1) Linux 6.0-rc1 > Hmmm, I want to also merge zboot support in the loongarch-next's base, > is that possible? > No, let's keep that separate. LoongArch boots fine without it, so we can wait until it arrives via the EFI tree, no?
