Hello Greg,
> From: Greg KH, Sent: Monday, October 16, 2023 4:49 PM
>
> On Mon, Oct 16, 2023 at 03:04:36AM +0000, Yoshihiro Shimoda wrote:
> > Hello Sasha,
> >
> > Thank you for backporting the latest ravb patches for stable.
> > I found one of patches [1] was queued into v5.10 and v5.4 [2].
> > However, another patch [3] was not queued into them. I guess
> > that this is because conflict happens.
> >
> > The reason for the conflict is that the condition in the following
> > line is diffetent:
> > ---
> > v5.10 or v5.4:
> > if (priv->chip_id != RCAR_GEN2) {
> >
> > mainline:
> > if (info->multi_irqs) {
> > ---
> >
> > However, this difference can be ignored when backporting. For your
> > reference, I wrote a sample patch at the end of this email. Would
> > you backport such a patch to v5.10 and v5.4? I would appreciate it
> > if you could let me know if there is an official way to request one.
> >
<snip URLs>
> >
> > ---
> > drivers/net/ethernet/renesas/ravb_main.c | 2 ++
> > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/renesas/ravb_main.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/renesas/ravb_main.c
> > index a59da6a11976..f218bacec001 100644
> > --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/renesas/ravb_main.c
> > +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/renesas/ravb_main.c
> > @@ -1706,6 +1706,8 @@ static int ravb_close(struct net_device *ndev)
> > of_phy_deregister_fixed_link(np);
> > }
> >
> > + cancel_work_sync(&priv->work);
> > +
> > if (priv->chip_id != RCAR_GEN2) {
> > free_irq(priv->tx_irqs[RAVB_NC], ndev);
> > free_irq(priv->rx_irqs[RAVB_NC], ndev);
> > --
> > 2.25.1
> >
>
> Can you please just send a working backport for the kernel trees you
> wish to see this applied to? Merging patches like this is not easy and
> doesn't usually result in a commit that we know actually works properly.
I got it. I'll make/send such patches.
Best regards,
Yoshihiro Shimoda
> thanks,
>
> greg k-h
