On Mon, Feb 25, 2019 at 9:35 AM Nathan Chancellor <natechancellor@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Mon, Feb 25, 2019 at 03:47:19PM +0100, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > > On Mon, Feb 25, 2019 at 03:45:13PM +0100, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > > > On Sun, Feb 24, 2019 at 11:13:01PM -0700, Nathan Chancellor wrote: > > > > Hi Greg and Sasha, > > > > > > > > Attached are three mbox files containing patches that bring the Clang > > > > backports that Nick did in 4.9.139 up to date with what is currently in > > > > 4.14 and mainline, as well as fix warnings that are present in the arm64 > > > > and x86_64 defconfigs here and in AOSP (cuttlefish_defconfig). All of > > > > these warnings are fixed in 4.14 so there will be no regressions from > > > > upgrading. > > > > > > Really? I see a number of these only showing up in much newer kernels. > > Sigh that's what I get for not double checking my email after adding > patches :( > > > > Specifically these patches: > > > 1f60652dd586 ("pinctrl: max77620: Use define directive for max77620_pinconf_param values") > > > a0dd6773038f ("phy: tegra: remove redundant self assignment of 'map'") > > > a9903f04e0a4 ("sched/sysctl: Fix attributes of some extern declarations") > > > > > > from the "arm" mbox you provided. Why shouldn't the above patches go > > > into 4.14.y and in some cases, also 4.19.y and 4.20.y? > > They should. All three pick cleanly to 4.14.y. Only the first one needs > to be taken into 4.19.y and 4.20.y. I feel like I need a script that given a sha, tells me what LTS branches the patch is in or not. I have this to tell me "when (what's the first tag that contains this commit)" a patch first landed: function first_tag () { tag=$1 git describe --contains "$tag" | sed 's/~.*//' } So say a patch landed in 4.15-rc1; and I want to backport to 4.9 and 4.14 (but it's already been backported to 4.14). Does anyone have a script to check this quickly? The process for seeing which LTS contains a commit or not still is very manual. I guess backports that require modification probably complicate the search further. Just asking, in case this is already a solved problem. -- Thanks, ~Nick Desaulniers