Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 7 Nov 2022 13:19:20 +0100 | From | Greg Kroah-Hartman <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 5.10] coresight: cti: Fix hang in cti_disable_hw() |
| |
On Mon, Nov 07, 2022 at 11:15:35AM +0000, Suzuki K Poulose wrote: > Hi Greg, > > On 07/11/2022 10:24, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > > On Mon, Nov 07, 2022 at 09:59:24AM +0000, Suzuki K Poulose wrote: > > > On 07/11/2022 09:52, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > > > > On Mon, Nov 07, 2022 at 09:23:26AM +0000, Suzuki K Poulose wrote: > > > > > On 07/11/2022 09:11, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > > > > > > On Wed, Nov 02, 2022 at 11:20:03AM +0000, James Clark wrote: > > > > > > > commit 6746eae4bbaddcc16b40efb33dab79210828b3ce upstream. > > > > > > > > > > > > Isn't this commit 665c157e0204176023860b51a46528ba0ba62c33 instead? > > > > > > > > > > This was reverted in commit d76308f03ee1 and pushed in later > > > > > with fixups as 6746eae4bbadd. > > > > > > > > So which should be applied? > > > > > > Sorry, this particular post is a backport for v5.10 stable branch. > > > > > > > > > > > confused, > > > > > > Now I am too. What is expected here ? My understanding is, we > > > should stick the "upstream" commit that is getting backported > > > at the beginning of the commit description. In that sense, > > > the commit id in this patch looks correct to me. Please let > > > me know if this is not the case. > > > > > > As such, this is only for 5.10.x branch. The rest are taken > > > care of. > > > > > > Please let us know if we are something missing. > > > > We already have commit 665c157e0204176023860b51a46528ba0ba62c33 queued > > up in the 5.10 stable queue. Is that not correct? It has the same > > We pushed the fix as part of the coresight fixes for 6.1 [0], as > > commit: 6746eae4bbad "coresight: cti: Fix hang in cti_disable_hw()" > > > But, the version in there, produced a build warning with "unused > variable" (with CONFIG_WERROR) [1] and thus was reverted in [2], > > commit: d76308f03ee1: Revert "coresight: cti: Fix hang in cti_disable_hw()" > > > Later, we sent you the corrected fix separately [3], which was queued as > commit "6746eae4bbadd". > > 6746eae4bbad coresight: cti: Fix hang in cti_disable_hw() > > So, in effect, here is what we have in the tree : > > $ git log --oneline | grep "cti: Fix" > 6746eae4bbad coresight: cti: Fix hang in cti_disable_hw() > d76308f03ee1 Revert "coresight: cti: Fix hang in cti_disable_hw()" > 665c157e0204 coresight: cti: Fix hang in cti_disable_hw() > > > subject line as this one. > > I understand the "same" subject line has caused this confusion. Will > modify it in the future avoid this confusion. > > So, kindly drop "665c157e0204" from the queue for 5.10, it would fail to > apply there anyway so does the correct "6746eae4bbad". This backport > is appropriate for 5.10 branch, with the correct version.
Ok, I dropped 665c157e0204 from the queue, but note that it _was_ backported there properly. But only there, which is odd, Sasha's scripts might not have caught up.
I'll queue this one up now instead.
thanks,
greg k-h
| |