From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-1.web.codeaurora.org [10.30.226.201]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6D3BD35953; Sat, 1 Feb 2025 15:34:28 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1738424069; cv=none; b=XOxq2F6CHdmmQDQ9r8Q34caOZg3NEIMPYNxuLtN+oZ7yito7+vNWpa4Pz1UtBi8BsDAs3LtdfXGjqaLquZxcnojf0uG9t+D4Bj/ab8D4G7pG1OIsrWKOrCDwCGW1EhTqiCWgV8o0dw1Q9VXTIX6yz8Vg0JchBlFHAXNaOfHtLU0= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1738424069; c=relaxed/simple; bh=EP9LgQDEBEPzU128nXmG9kkyyfypu4TcWapUThglgXA=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=Bwu2EfNp4ggTaUOhsmSTyJZ79y4RSETBvZmYfLQOYu1uUjI3uqKu39Lmmw4+HFVeKIwMHxue/vZNJGxsLiOC/Fo7ZoLpmWXKskYzc51VQ8zmTDEU7SQ7VRJwR3so2bH6gzFn7JljPd6v8EwvFA1xsHZIRTZvoNwH7aNz8Yk6D/s= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=linuxfoundation.org header.i=@linuxfoundation.org header.b=Twa+NZ+T; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=linuxfoundation.org header.i=@linuxfoundation.org header.b="Twa+NZ+T" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 126D3C4CED3; Sat, 1 Feb 2025 15:34:28 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=linuxfoundation.org; s=korg; t=1738424068; bh=EP9LgQDEBEPzU128nXmG9kkyyfypu4TcWapUThglgXA=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=Twa+NZ+Tx3MJzP2dhuqTwYgsVzjdkJ1zRCSefCk7KZWcPD7xq0HPnwHtE3Rt7cooQ 9mfe2dZP14W9IC0IEiJv46u3Dh8swoWdpI4Nurt74LE7ty85oP6NET68b0C/VGQmDg pBsCxH094f7Lc8jgtbWXPqpRhVbEN9UMnCLkrMzE= Date: Sat, 1 Feb 2025 16:34:25 +0100 From: Greg Kroah-Hartman To: Guenter Roeck Cc: Pavel Machek , stable@vger.kernel.org, patches@lists.linux.dev, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, torvalds@linux-foundation.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org, shuah@kernel.org, patches@kernelci.org, lkft-triage@lists.linaro.org, jonathanh@nvidia.com, f.fainelli@gmail.com, sudipm.mukherjee@gmail.com, srw@sladewatkins.net, rwarsow@gmx.de, conor@kernel.org, hargar@microsoft.com, broonie@kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 5.4 00/94] 5.4.290-rc2 review Message-ID: <2025020108-shape-clapped-305c@gregkh> References: <20250131112114.030356568@linuxfoundation.org> <2025020157-unsecured-map-aa0c@gregkh> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: patches@lists.linux.dev List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: On Sat, Feb 01, 2025 at 07:03:33AM -0800, Guenter Roeck wrote: > On 2/1/25 00:01, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > ... > > 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? > > > > Looking into the 5.4 release candidate, I see: > > $ git log --oneline v5.4.289.. arch/riscv/ > 98d26e0254ff RISC-V: Don't enable all interrupts in trap_init() > 574c5efceb70 riscv: prefix IRQ_ macro names with an RV_ namespace > c57ffe372502 riscv: Fix sleeping in invalid context in die() > 98c62ee8bc75 riscv: Avoid enabling interrupts in die() > 88cb873873ff RISC-V: Avoid dereferening NULL regs in die() > 2a83ad25311e riscv: remove unused handle_exception symbol > 8652d51931cc riscv: abstract out CSR names for supervisor vs machine mode I've dropped them all now, as that is what was causing the build problems. > Why do you backport riscv patches to 5.4.y if you think they should not be > tested ? Shouldn't your question imply that there won't be any further > backports into 5.4.y for architecture(s) which are no longer supported > in that branch ? I'm not implying they are not to be tested, it's just a real "is this something that people actually care about" question. Last time we had riscv problems in this branch the riscv maintainers said "don't worry about it". I didn't notice that Sasha had queued these up here, otherwise I would have probably just dropped them then like I did right now :) thanks, greg k-h