Re: [ 00/14] 3.4.61-stable review

[Shuah Khan]

On 09/06/2013 05:11 PM, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 06, 2013 at 04:23:16PM -0600, Shuah Khan wrote:
> > On 09/06/2013 12:46 PM, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> > > On Fri, Sep 06, 2013 at 11:47:01AM -0600, Shuah Khan wrote:
> > > > On 09/05/2013 02:28 PM, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> > > > > This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 3.4.61 release.
> > > > > There are 14 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.
> > > > >
> > > > > Responses should be made by Sat Sep  7 20:25:41 UTC 2013.
> > > > > Anything received after that time might be too late.
> > > > >
> > > > > The whole patch series can be found in one patch at:
> > > > > 	kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/v3.0/stable-review/patch-3.4.61-rc1.gz
> > > > > and the diffstat can be found below.
> > > > >
> > > > > thanks,
> > > > >
> > > > > greg k-h
> > > > >
> > > > > -------------
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > 3.4.61-rc1 applied cleanly to 3.4.60
> > > >
> > > > Compiled and booted on the following systems:
> > > >
> > > > Samsung Series 9 900X4C Intel Corei5
> > > > HP ProBook 6475b AMD A10-4600M APU with Radeon(tm) HD Graphics
> > > >
> > > > dmesgs look good. No regressions compared to the previous dmesgs for
> > > > this release. dmesg emerg, crit, alert, err are clean. No
> > > > regressions in warn.
> > >
> > > Thanks for testing and letting me know.
> > >
> > > > Compile tested on Samsung Chromebook Exynos5 (ARMv7):
> > > > 3.4.60 compile fail - it is not a regression. Existing issue in
> > > > 3.4.y It has to do with missing config selections in
> > > > arch/arm/mach-exynos/Kconfig for this system. Debugging now using
> > > > the Kconfig selections from 3.10.y for this file.
> > >
> > > Is there a patch I can backport for this to work properly?  I'd like to
> > > get some type of ARM coverage if possible.
> > >
> > > thanks,
> > >
> > > greg k-h
> >
> > Greg,
> >
> > I did some debugging and found 3.4 needs several patches to that
> > made exynos4 support common for exynos4 and exynos5. It appears some
> > changes made it into 3.4, at least changing the directory name from
> > mach-exynos4 to mach-exynos, however the rest of the support is not
> > in 3.4. I identified the following commits:
> >
> > 6f9e95e6ed34ceff090ec1a1d27dfc85828d1dbd
> > 60e49ca654eea42e04912b259fa36bad2c3e56ef
> > 20ef9e08d27b3f5e09c32d4d371fa97f610a3069
>
> Those three are "reasonable".

Cool. I will pull just these 3 patches and see if that works and let you 
know if it works.

> > b1b3f49ce4606452279b58b17f2bbe2ba00304b
>
> That just reorders the config options, is that really needed?
>
> So, with those first 3 patches, does the kernel now work on that
> platform for you?
>
> thanks,
>
> greg k-h

Yes the last one b1b3f49ce4606452279b58b17f2bbe2ba00304b, is a 
reordering patch.

-- Shuah
--
Shuah Khan
Senior Linux Kernel Developer - Open Source Group
Samsung Research America(Silicon Valley)
shuah.kh@xxxxxxxxxxx | (970) 672-0658
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/