On Thu, Apr 06, 2023 at 11:06:50AM +0200, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
> [CCing the stable list as well as Greg and Sasha so they can correct me
> if I write something stupid]
>
> On 06.04.23 10:27, Ricardo Cañuelo wrote:
> >
> > On 5/4/23 19:14, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
> >> Wait, what? A patch (5225e1b87432 ("ARM: dts: meson: Fix the UART
> >> compatible strings")) that was merged for v5.17-rc4 and is not in the
> >> list of patches that were in 4.14.312-rc1
> >> (https://lore.kernel.org/all/20230403140351.636471867@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/
> >> ) is meant to suddenly cause this? How is this possible? Am I totally on
> >> the wrong track here and misunderstanding something, or is this a
> >> bisection that went horribly sideways?
> >
> > I didn't say this was introduced in 4.14.312-rc1, this has been failing
> > for a long time and it was merged for 4.14.267:
> > https://lwn.net/Articles/884977/
> >
> > Sorry I wasn't clear before.
>
> Ahh, no worries and thx for this. But well, in that case let me get back
> to something from your report:
>
> >>> KernelCI detected that this patch introduced a regression in
> >>> stable-rc/linux-4.14.y on a meson8b-odroidc1.
> >>> After this patch was applied the tests running on this platform don't
> >>> show any serial output.
> >>>
> >>> This doesn't happen in other stable branches nor in mainline, but 4.14
> >>> hasn't still reached EOL and it'd be good to find a fix.
>
> Well, the stable maintainers may correct me if I'm wrong, but as far as
> I know in that case it's the duty of the stable team (which was not even
> CCed on the report afaics) to look into this for two reasons:
>
> * the regression does not happened in mainline (and maybe never has)
>
> * mainline developers never signed up for maintaining their work in
> longterm kernels; quite a few nevertheless help in situation like this,
> at least for recent series and if they asked for a backport through a
> "CC: <stable@" tag – but the latter doesn't seem to be the case here
> (not totally sure, but it looks like AUTOSEL picked this up) and it's a
> quite old series.
That is all true.
So can the original report be sent to stable@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx and we can
take it from there?
thanks,
greg k-h
