On Wed, May 01, 2024 at 02:50:05PM -0500, Alex Elder wrote: > This commit landed in Linux v5.16, and should have been back-ported > to stable branches: > 0ac10b291bee8 arm64: dts: qcom: Fix 'interrupt-map' parent address cells > > It has three hunks, and the commit can be cherry-picked directly > into the 5.15.y and 5.10.y stable branches. The first hunk fixes > a problem first introduced in Linux v5.2, so that hunk (only) should > be back-ported to v5.4.y. > > Signed-off-by: Alex Elder <elder@xxxxxxxxxx> > > Is there anything further I need to do? If you'd prefer I send > patches, I can do that also (just ask). Thanks. > > -Alex > > > Rob's original fix in Linus' tree: > 0ac10b291bee8 arm64: dts: qcom: Fix 'interrupt-map' parent address cells > This first landed in v5.16. > > The commit that introduced the problem in the first hunk: > b84dfd175c098 arm64: dts: qcom: msm8998: Add PCIe PHY and RC nodes > This first landed in v5.2, so back-port to v5.4.y, v5.10.y, v5.15.y. > > The commit that introduced the problem in the second hunk: > 5c538e09cb19b arm64: dts: qcom: sdm845: Add first PCIe controller and PHY > This first landed in v5.7, so back-port to v5.10.y, v5.15.y > > The commit that introduced the problem in the third hunk: > 42ad231338c14 arm64: dts: qcom: sdm845: Add second PCIe PHY and controller > This first landed in v5.7 also > > > I'm confused, I applied this to 5.10.y and 5.15.y now, but it did not apply to 5.4.y, and I did not understand the "first-third" type comments about hunks here, sorry. Can you just provide a working backport for 5.4.y? thanks, greg k-h
