On Tue, Sep 21, 2021 at 11:02:52PM +0100, Russell King (Oracle) wrote: > On Tue, Sep 21, 2021 at 11:45:28PM +0200, Pavel Machek wrote: > > Hi! > > > > > > > Joakim Zhang reports that Wake-on-Lan with the stmmac ethernet driver broke > > > > > when moving the incorrect handling of mac link state out of mac_config(). > > > > > This reason this breaks is because the stmmac's WoL is handled by the MAC > > > > > rather than the PHY, and phylink doesn't cater for that scenario. > > > > > > > > > > This patch adds the necessary phylink code to handle suspend/resume events > > > > > according to whether the MAC still needs a valid link or not. This is the > > > > > barest minimum for this support. > > > > > > > > This adds functions that end up being unused in 5.10. AFAICT we do not > > > > need this in 5.10. > > > > > > It needs to be backported to any kernel that also has > > > "net: stmmac: fix MAC not working when system resume back with WoL active" > > > backported to. From what I can tell, the fixes line in that commit > > > refers to a commit (46f69ded988d) in v5.7-rc1. > > > > > > If "net: stmmac: fix MAC not working when system resume back with WoL > > > active" is not being backported to 5.10, then there is no need to > > > backport this patch. > > > > Agreed. > > > > > As I'm not being copied on the stmmac commit, I've no idea which kernels > > > this patch should be backported to. > > > > AFAICT "net: stmmac: fix MAC not working when..." is not queued for > > 5.10.68-rc1 or 5.14.7-rc1. > > Okay, this is madness. What is going on with stable's patch selection? > The logic seems completely reversed. > > "net: phylink: Update SFP selected interface on advertising changes" > does not have a Fixes tag, and is not a fix in itself, yet has been > picked up by the stable team. It lays the necessary work for its > counter-part patch, which is... > > "net: stmmac: fix system hang caused by eee_ctrl_timer during > suspend/resume" _has_ a Fixes tag, but has *not* been picked up by > the stable team. > > It seems there's something very wrong process-wise here. Why would > a patch _without_ a Fixes line and isn't a fix in itself be picked > out for stable backport when patches with a Fixes line are ignored? Because they came in through two different sets of processes. And during the -rc1 merge window madness, we have lots to still catch up on because of all of the "fixes" that people wait to get into the tree then. > Not unless the stable plan is to apply "net: phylink: Update SFP > selected interface on advertising changes" and then sometime later > apply "net: stmmac: fix system hang caused by eee_ctrl_timer during > suspend/resume". No idea. > > It all seems very weird and the process seems broken to me. Help is always gladly accepted. Marking patches explicitly for stable with a cc: stable is always the easiest way into the tree. Otherwise we have to do hueristics in looking at changelog text and Fixes: tags to try to guess what is, and is not, valid for stable trees. thanks, greg k-h
