On Fri, Sep 06, 2013 at 04:23:16PM -0600, Shuah Khan wrote: > On 09/06/2013 12:46 PM, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > >On Fri, Sep 06, 2013 at 11:47:01AM -0600, Shuah Khan wrote: > >>On 09/05/2013 02:28 PM, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > >>>This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 3.4.61 release. > >>>There are 14 patches in this series, all will be posted as a response > >>>to this one. If anyone has any issues with these being applied, please > >>>let me know. > >>> > >>>Responses should be made by Sat Sep 7 20:25:41 UTC 2013. > >>>Anything received after that time might be too late. > >>> > >>>The whole patch series can be found in one patch at: > >>> kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/v3.0/stable-review/patch-3.4.61-rc1.gz > >>>and the diffstat can be found below. > >>> > >>>thanks, > >>> > >>>greg k-h > >>> > >>>------------- > >> > >> > >>3.4.61-rc1 applied cleanly to 3.4.60 > >> > >>Compiled and booted on the following systems: > >> > >>Samsung Series 9 900X4C Intel Corei5 > >>HP ProBook 6475b AMD A10-4600M APU with Radeon(tm) HD Graphics > >> > >>dmesgs look good. No regressions compared to the previous dmesgs for > >>this release. dmesg emerg, crit, alert, err are clean. No > >>regressions in warn. > > > >Thanks for testing and letting me know. > > > >>Compile tested on Samsung Chromebook Exynos5 (ARMv7): > >>3.4.60 compile fail - it is not a regression. Existing issue in > >>3.4.y It has to do with missing config selections in > >>arch/arm/mach-exynos/Kconfig for this system. Debugging now using > >>the Kconfig selections from 3.10.y for this file. > > > >Is there a patch I can backport for this to work properly? I'd like to > >get some type of ARM coverage if possible. > > > >thanks, > > > >greg k-h > > > > Greg, > > I did some debugging and found 3.4 needs several patches to that > made exynos4 support common for exynos4 and exynos5. It appears some > changes made it into 3.4, at least changing the directory name from > mach-exynos4 to mach-exynos, however the rest of the support is not > in 3.4. I identified the following commits: > > 6f9e95e6ed34ceff090ec1a1d27dfc85828d1dbd > 60e49ca654eea42e04912b259fa36bad2c3e56ef > 20ef9e08d27b3f5e09c32d4d371fa97f610a3069 Those three are "reasonable". > b1b3f49ce4606452279b58b17f2bbe2ba00304b That just reorders the config options, is that really needed? So, with those first 3 patches, does the kernel now work on that platform for you? thanks, greg k-h -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe stable" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html