On Fri, Jan 31, 2025 at 01:56:04PM +0100, Pavel Machek wrote: > Hi! > > > This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 5.4.290 release. > > There are 94 patches in this series, all will be posted as a response > > to this one. If anyone has any issues with these being applied, please > > let me know. > > Still not ok. > > In file included from ./arch/riscv/include/asm/ptrace.h:10, > 1128 > from ./arch/riscv/include/asm/processor.h:11, > 1129 > from ./arch/riscv/include/asm/irqflags.h:10, > 1130 > from ./include/linux/irqflags.h:16, > 1131 > from ./arch/riscv/include/asm/bitops.h:14, > 1132 > from ./include/linux/bitops.h:27, > 1133 > from ./include/linux/kernel.h:12, > 1134 > from ./include/linux/list.h:9, > 1135 > from ./include/linux/kobject.h:19, > 1136 > from ./include/linux/device.h:16, > 1137 > from ./include/linux/node.h:18, > 1138 > from ./include/linux/cpu.h:17, > 1139 > from arch/riscv/kernel/traps.c:6: > 1140 > arch/riscv/kernel/traps.c: In function 'trap_init': > 1141 > arch/riscv/kernel/traps.c:164:23: error: 'handle_exception' undeclared (first use in this function) > 1142 > 164 | csr_write(CSR_TVEC, &handle_exception); > 1143 > | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > 1144 > ./arch/riscv/include/asm/csr.h:166:38: note: in definition of macro 'csr_write' > 1145 > 166 | unsigned long __v = (unsigned long)(val); \ > 1146 > | ^~~ > 1147 What's it with the blank lines? Anyway, are you all really caring about riscv on a 5.4.y kernel? Last I checked, the riscv maintainers said not to even use that kernel for that architecture. Do you all have real boards that care about this kernel tree that you are insisting on keeping alive? Why not move them to a newer LTS kernel? thanks, greg k-h
