Hi Bartosz, On Wed, 21 Sep 2022 21:04:27 +0100, Bartosz Golaszewski <brgl@xxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Wed, Sep 21, 2022 at 6:57 PM Marc Zyngier <maz@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > On 2022-09-21 16:54, Sasha Levin wrote: > > > From: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > > > > [ Upstream commit 94e9bc73d85aa6ecfe249e985ff57abe0ab35f34 ] > > > > > > This turns the IXP4xx GPIO irqchip into an immutable > > > irqchip, a bit different from the standard template due > > > to being hierarchical. > > > > > > Tested on the IXP4xx which uses drivers/ata/pata_ixp4xx_cf.c > > > for a rootfs on compact flash with IRQs from this GPIO > > > block to the CF ATA controller. > > > > > > Cc: Marc Zyngier <maz@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > Signed-off-by: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > Acked-by: Marc Zyngier <maz@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > Signed-off-by: Bartosz Golaszewski <brgl@xxxxxxxx> > > > Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > > Why? The required dependencies are only in 5,19, and are > > definitely NOT a stable candidate... > > > > This isn't a fix by any stretch of the imagination. > > > > Hi Marc, > > While I didn't mark it for stable (and it shouldn't go into any branch > earlier than 5.19.x), I did send the patches making the irqchips > immutable to Linus Torvalds as fixes as they technically do *fix* the > warning emitted by gpiolib and make the implementation correct. > > I think these patches should still be part of the v5.19.x stable branch. 5.19, sure. All the dependencies are there, and tightening the driver implementations is a valuable goal. However, targeting all the other stable releases (5.4, 5.10, 5.15) makes little sense. It won't even compile! Do the dependencies need to be backported? I don't think it is worthwhile, as this is a long series containing multiple related changes spread all over the tree. This would defeat the very purpose of a stable tree. M. -- Without deviation from the norm, progress is not possible.