On Tuesday, May 16, 2023 2:14 AM, florian@xxxxxxxxxx <florian@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >Am 2023-05-11 08:56, schrieb Song, Yoong Siang: >> On Thursday, May 11, 2023 6:46 AM , Greg KH >> <gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>> On Thu, May 11, 2023 at 12:01:36AM +0200, Florian Bezdeka wrote: >>>> Hi all, >>>> >>>> On 07.05.23 08:44, gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote: >>>> > >>>> > The patch below does not apply to the 6.1-stable tree. >>>> > If someone wants it applied there, or to any other stable or >>>> > longterm tree, then please email the backport, including the >>>> > original git commit id to <stable@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>. >>>> > >>>> > To reproduce the conflict and resubmit, you may use the following >commands: >>>> > >>>> > git fetch >>>> > https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/stable/linux.git/ >>>> > linux-6.1.y git checkout FETCH_HEAD git cherry-pick -x >>>> > 3ce29c17dc847bf4245e16aad78a7617afa96297 >>>> > # <resolve conflicts, build, test, etc.> git commit -s git >>>> > send-email --to '<stable@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>' --in-reply-to >>>> > '2023050749- >>> deskwork-snowboard-82cf@gregkh' --subject-prefix 'PATCH 6.1.y' HEAD^.. >>>> >>>> Is someone already working on that? I would love to see this patch >>>> in 6.1. If no further activities are planned I might have the >>>> option/time to supply a backport as well. >>> >>> Please supply a backport, I don't think anyone is working on it :) >> >> Hi Florian, >> >> I not yet got plan to backport the patch, so I am more than happy if >> you could supply a backport. >> >> Most probably the issue is due to missing "#include >> <linux/bitfield.h>". > >Exactly. > >The build failure: > >In file included from drivers/net/ethernet/intel/igc/igc_hw.h:17, > from drivers/net/ethernet/intel/igc/igc.h:17, > from drivers/net/ethernet/intel/igc/igc_main.c:19: >drivers/net/ethernet/intel/igc/igc_main.c: In function >‘igc_configure_rx_ring’: >drivers/net/ethernet/intel/igc/igc_base.h:92:41: error: implicit declaration of >function ‘FIELD_PREP’ >[-Werror=implicit-function-declaration] > 92 | #define IGC_SRRCTL_BSIZEHDR(x) >FIELD_PREP(IGC_SRRCTL_BSIZEHDR_MASK, \ > | ^~~~~~~~~~ >drivers/net/ethernet/intel/igc/igc_main.c:647:19: note: in expansion of macro >‘IGC_SRRCTL_BSIZEHDR’ > 647 | srrctl |= IGC_SRRCTL_BSIZEHDR(IGC_RX_HDR_LEN); > | > > >For 6.3 on-wards we have the following include chain: > >In file included from ./include/net/xdp.h:11, > from ./include/linux/netdevice.h:43, > from ./include/linux/if_vlan.h:10, > from drivers/net/ethernet/intel/igc/igc_main.c:6: > >I think <linux/bitfield.h> is available "by accident" and your mainline patch is >faulty. igc_base.h now depends on bitfield.h but you forgot to include it. > >How do we deal with that? I think it should be fixed in mainline as well. > >I fear that adding the missing include in igc_base.h within the backport breaks any >further auto-backporting for the igc driver as patches might not apply cleanly >when stable diverges from mainline. > >Florian Yes, I agree that proper fix should be adding "#include <linux/bitfield.h>" into igc_base.h. Do you got plan to submit the fix upstream? Recently, there is a bug fix patch merged into bpf-next. That patch will add "#include <linux/bitfield.h>" into igc.h, which I think should indirectly solve the problem. Thus, backport this patch will be alternate solution: https://lore.kernel.org/all/168182464270.616355.11391652654430626584.stgit@firesoul/ Thanks & Regards Siang > >> >> Will you do it for 5.15 and 6.2 as well? >> >> Thanks & Regards >> Siang
