On 12/16/22 13:22, Marc Zyngier wrote: > On 2022-12-16 16:37, Sean Anderson wrote: >> Hi Stable maintainers, >> >> On 12/5/22 06:21, irqchip-bot for Sean Anderson wrote: >>> The following commit has been merged into the irq/irqchip-next branch of irqchip: >>> >>> Commit-ID: 3ae977d0e4e3a2a2ccc912ca2d20c9430508ecdd >>> Gitweb: https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/maz/arm-platforms/3ae977d0e4e3a2a2ccc912ca2d20c9430508ecdd >>> Author: Sean Anderson <sean.anderson@xxxxxxxx> >>> AuthorDate: Thu, 01 Dec 2022 16:28:07 -05:00 >>> Committer: Marc Zyngier <maz@xxxxxxxxxx> >>> CommitterDate: Mon, 05 Dec 2022 10:39:52 >>> >>> irqchip/ls-extirq: Fix endianness detection >>> >>> parent is the interrupt parent, not the parent of node. Use >>> node->parent. This fixes endianness detection on big-endian platforms. >>> >>> Fixes: 1b00adce8afd ("irqchip/ls-extirq: Fix invalid wait context by avoiding to use regmap") >>> Signed-off-by: Sean Anderson <sean.anderson@xxxxxxxx> >>> Signed-off-by: Marc Zyngier <maz@xxxxxxxxxx> >>> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20221201212807.616191-1-sean.anderson@xxxxxxxx >>> --- >>> drivers/irqchip/irq-ls-extirq.c | 2 +- >>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) >>> >>> diff --git a/drivers/irqchip/irq-ls-extirq.c b/drivers/irqchip/irq-ls-extirq.c >>> index d8d48b1..139f26b 100644 >>> --- a/drivers/irqchip/irq-ls-extirq.c >>> +++ b/drivers/irqchip/irq-ls-extirq.c >>> @@ -203,7 +203,7 @@ ls_extirq_of_init(struct device_node *node, struct device_node *parent) >>> if (ret) >>> goto err_parse_map; >>> >>> - priv->big_endian = of_device_is_big_endian(parent); >>> + priv->big_endian = of_device_is_big_endian(node->parent); >>> priv->is_ls1021a_or_ls1043a = of_device_is_compatible(node, "fsl,ls1021a-extirq") || >>> of_device_is_compatible(node, "fsl,ls1043a-extirq"); >>> raw_spin_lock_init(&priv->lock); >> >> This patch has made it into linux/master, but it should also get >> backported to 6.1. Just want to make sure this doesn't fall through the >> cracks, since this was a really annoying bug to deal with (causes an IRQ >> storm). > > If you wanted it backported, why didn't it have a Cc: stable > the first place? In any case, if you want a backport to happen, > you'll have to post that backport. Usually, anything with a Fixes: tag gets picked up. Actually, I was expecting you to submit a PR for 6.1, since this was submitted before that release came out. That said, this email is "option 2" of Documentation/process/stable-kernel-rules.rst, so I don't think I need to do "option 3". --Sean
