Re: [GIT PULL] RISC-V Patches for the 5.10 Merge Window, Part 1

From: Palmer Dabbelt
Date: Mon Oct 19 2020 - 17:30:23 EST

On Mon, 19 Oct 2020 14:21:33 PDT (-0700), ardb@xxxxxxxxxx wrote:
On Mon, 19 Oct 2020 at 23:00, Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On Mon, 19 Oct 2020 13:43:27 PDT (-0700), atishp@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 19, 2020 at 12:08 PM Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>
>> The following changes since commit d012a7190fc1fd72ed48911e77ca97ba4521bccd:
>>
>> Linux 5.9-rc2 (2020-08-23 14:08:43 -0700)
>>
>> are available in the Git repository at:
>>
>> git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/riscv/linux.git tags/riscv-for-linus-5.10-mw0
>>
>> for you to fetch changes up to de22d2107ced3cc5355cc9dbbd85e44183546bd5:
>>
>> RISC-V: Add page table dump support for uefi (2020-10-02 14:31:33 -0700)
>>
>> ----------------------------------------------------------------
>> RISC-V Patches for the 5.10 Merge Window, Part 1
>>
>> This contains a handful of cleanups and new features, including:
>>
>> * A handful of cleanups for our page fault handling.
>> * Improvements to how we fill out cacheinfo.
>> * Support for EFI-based systems.
>>
>> ---
>>
>> This contains a merge from the EFI tree that was necessary as some of the EFI
>> support landed over there. It's my first time doing something like this,
>>
>> I haven't included the set_fs stuff because the base branch it depends on
>> hasn't been merged yet. I'll probably have another merge window PR, as
>> there's more in flight (most notably the fix for new binutils I just sent out),
>> but I figured there was no reason to delay this any longer.
>>
>> There is one merge conflict, which is between my fixes and for-next branches:
>>
>> diff --cc arch/riscv/kernel/vmlinux.lds.S
>> index 67db80e12d1f,9795359cb9da..ffaa3da375c2
>> --- a/arch/riscv/kernel/vmlinux.lds.S
>> +++ b/arch/riscv/kernel/vmlinux.lds.S
>> @@@ -66,8 -71,11 +70,13 @@@ SECTION
>> _etext = .;
>> }
>>
>> + INIT_DATA_SECTION(16)
>> +
>> + #ifdef CONFIG_EFI
>> + . = ALIGN(PECOFF_SECTION_ALIGNMENT);
>> + __pecoff_text_end = .;
>> + #endif
>> +
>> /* Start of data section */
>> _sdata = .;
>> RO_DATA(SECTION_ALIGN)
>>
>> ----------------------------------------------------------------
>> Anup Patel (1):
>> RISC-V: Move DT mapping outof fixmap
>>
>> Ard Biesheuvel (3):
>> efi/libstub: arm32: Base FDT and initrd placement on image address
>> efi/libstub: Export efi_low_alloc_above() to other units
>> efi/libstub: arm32: Use low allocation for the uncompressed kernel
>>
>
> I thought these 3 were being taken through the EFI tree. I already see
> them in the master branch.
>
> 762cd288fc4a efi/libstub: arm32: Use low allocation for the uncompressed kernel
> 1a895dbf4b66 efi/libstub: Export efi_low_alloc_above() to other units
> 6208857b8f7e efi/libstub: arm32: Base FDT and initrd placement on image address

I see them in Linus' master with those exact hashes, so IIUC this is all OK? I
guess I just assumed they were supposed to show up in the shortlog, but it's my
first time trying one of these multi-tree merges so maybe I screwed something
up?

I obtained these by merging a tag from the EFI tree (that's already been
merged) into my tree, which looks OK to me:

commit 8a3f30c4319dc70547f11c18da2e7b5987543aa1
gpg: Signature made Fri 02 Oct 2020 02:30:05 PM PDT
gpg: using RSA key 2B3C3747446843B24A943A7A2E1319F35FBB1889
gpg: issuer "palmer@xxxxxxxxxxx"
gpg: Good signature from "Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@xxxxxxxxxxx>" [ultimate]
gpg: aka "Palmer Dabbelt <palmerdabbelt@xxxxxxxxxx>" [ultimate]
merged tag 'efi-riscv-shared-for-v5.10'
gpg: Signature made Wed 16 Sep 2020 08:57:07 AM PDT
gpg: using RSA key 9CD2A0DA6AD8F7330175E2BBC237207E9574FA7D
gpg: Good signature from "Adriaan (Ard) Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@xxxxxxxxxx>" [unknown]
gpg: aka "Adriaan (Ard) Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@xxxxxxxxx>" [unknown]
gpg: aka "Adriaan (Ard) Biesheuvel <ardb@xxxxxxxxxx>" [unknown]
gpg: aka "Adriaan (Ard) Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@xxxxxxx>" [unknown]
gpg: WARNING: This key is not certified with a trusted signature!
gpg: There is no indication that the signature belongs to the owner.
Primary key fingerprint: F43D 0332 8115 A198 C900 1688 3D20 0E9C A632 9909
Subkey fingerprint: 9CD2 A0DA 6AD8 F733 0175 E2BB C237 207E 9574 FA7D
Merge: 54701a0d12e2 762cd288fc4a
Author: Palmer Dabbelt <palmerdabbelt@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri Oct 2 14:29:51 2020 -0700

Merge tag 'efi-riscv-shared-for-v5.10' of ssh://gitolite.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/efi/efi into for-next

Stable branch for v5.10 shared between the EFI and RISC-V trees

The RISC-V EFI boot and runtime support will be merged for v5.10 via
the RISC-V tree. However, it incorporates some changes that conflict
with other EFI changes that are in flight, so this tag serves as a
shared base that allows those conflicts to be resolved beforehand.

* tag 'efi-riscv-shared-for-v5.10' of ssh://gitolite.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/efi/efi:
efi/libstub: arm32: Use low allocation for the uncompressed kernel
efi/libstub: Export efi_low_alloc_above() to other units
efi/libstub: arm32: Base FDT and initrd placement on image address
efi: Rename arm-init to efi-init common for all arch
include: pe.h: Add RISC-V related PE definition

I think the actual issue here is just that whatever I pointed git to when
generating the PR didn't contain the merge of the shared code yet, so
git-shortlog included it?


This all looks fine. Usually in such cases, you don't know which
branch will gets pulled first, so it makes sense for each PR to
describe the shared changes.

OK, good to know -- I'd just been pointing my PRs at Linus' latest tag, rather
than directly at master, as it's less of a moving target. Sounds like that's a
reasonable thing to do, so I'll probably keep doing it (unless I forget ;))

Linus: Looks like this was all actually fine, but LMK if you have any issues.