On Mon, Jun 28, 2021 at 11:21 AM Bin Meng <bmeng.cn@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Mon, Jun 28, 2021 at 10:28 AM Kefeng Wang <wangkefeng.wang@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > > On 2021/6/28 9:15, Bin Meng wrote: > > > On Mon, Jun 28, 2021 at 8:53 AM Kefeng Wang <wangkefeng.wang@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > >> Hi， sorry for the mistake，the bug is fixed by > > >> > > >> https://lore.kernel.org/linux-riscv/20210602085517.127481-2-wangkefeng.wang@xxxxxxxxxx/ > > > What are we on the patch you mentioned? > > > > > > I don't see it applied in the linux/master. > > > > > > Also there should be a "Fixes" tag and stable@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx cc'ed > > > because 32-bit is broken since v5.12. > > > > https://kernel.googlesource.com/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/riscv/linux/+/c9811e379b211c67ba29fb09d6f644dd44cfcff2 > > > > it's on Palmer' riscv-next. > > Not sure riscv-next is for which release? This is a regression and > should be on 5.13. > > > > > Hi Palmer, should I resend or could you help me to add the fixes tag? Your patch mixed 2 things (fix plus one feature) together, so it is not proper to back port your patch. Here is my 2 cents: 1. Drop your patch from riscv-next 2. Apply my patch as it is a simple fix to previous commit. This allows stable kernel to cherry-pick the fix to v5.12 and v5.13. 3. Rebase your patch against mine, and resend v2 Let me know if this makes sense. Regards, Bin
