Re: Old commit back-port

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On 5/13/24 8:01 AM, Greg KH wrote:
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?

Yes, I will.  It might be a few days.	-Alex


thanks,

greg k-h





[Index of Archives]     [Linux Kernel]     [Kernel Development Newbies]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Video for Linux]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite Hiking]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]

  Powered by Linux