On Thu, Jul 22, 2021 at 1:53 PM Palmer Dabbelt <palmerdabbelt@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Thu, 15 Jul 2021 19:14:20 PDT (-0700), bmeng.cn@xxxxxxxxx wrote: > > On Thu, Jul 8, 2021 at 9:29 PM Bin Meng <bmeng.cn@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> > >> Hi Palmer, > >> > >> On Thu, Jul 1, 2021 at 10:20 AM Bin Meng <bmeng.cn@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> > > >> > On Thu, Jul 1, 2021 at 10:08 AM Kefeng Wang <wangkefeng.wang@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > On 2021/6/30 19:58, Bin Meng wrote: > >> > > > 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. > >> > > > >> > > "mem=" will change the range of memblock, so the fix part must be included. > >> > > > >> > > >> > Yes, so you can rebase the "mem=" changes on top of my patch. > >> > > >> > The practice is that we should not mix 2 things in one patch. I can > >> > imagine that you wanted to add "mem=" to RISC-V and suddenly found the > >> > existing logic was broken, so you sent one patch to do both. > >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > >> > > > 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. > >> > > > >> > > It is not a big problem for me, but I have no right abourt riscv-next, > >> > > > >> > > let's wait Palmer's advise. > >> > > > >> > > >> > Sure. Palmer, let me know your thoughts. > >> > >> Ping? > > > > Ping? > > Sorry, I missed this one. It looks like the patch that adds mem= and > fixes the bug has already been merged, so I'm not really quite sure what > the right thing to do is here: we don't really want the mem= code on > stable, but we do want the fix. I went ahead and did > > commit 444818b599189fd8b6c814da542ff8cfc9fe67d4 (HEAD -> fixes, palmer/fixes) > gpg: Signature made Wed 21 Jul 2021 10:21:05 PM PDT > gpg: using RSA key 2B3C3747446843B24A943A7A2E1319F35FBB1889 > gpg: issuer "palmer@xxxxxxxxxxx" > gpg: Good signature from "Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@xxxxxxxxxxx>" [ultimate] > gpg: aka "Palmer Dabbelt <palmerdabbelt@xxxxxxxxxx>" [ultimate] > Merge: e73f0f0ee754 d0e4dae74470 > Author: Palmer Dabbelt <palmerdabbelt@xxxxxxxxxx> > Date: Wed Jul 21 22:18:58 2021 -0700 > > Merge remote-tracking branch 'riscv/riscv-fix-32bit' into fixes > > This contains a single fix for 32-bit boot. It happens this was already > fixed by c9811e379b21 ("riscv: Add mem kernel parameter support"), but > the bug existed before that feature addition so I've applied the patch > earlier and then merged it in (which results in a conflict, which is > fixed via not changing the resulting tree). > > * riscv/riscv-fix-32bit: > riscv: Fix 32-bit RISC-V boot failure > > as that"s the best I could come up with -- then the fix will land on > master, which should cause it to get pulled onto stable. > > Greg: is there a better way to make something like this get to stable? We can: 1. git revert c9811e379b21 ("riscv: Add mem kernel parameter support") 2. git am <this patch>, cc stable 3. Kefeng resent a new patch that adds the mem kernel parameter support, on top of mine Regards, Bin
