From: Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au>
To: Nathan Chancellor <nathan@kernel.org>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>
Cc: Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@google.com>,
Tom Rix <trix@redhat.com>, Paul Menzel <pmenzel@molgen.mpg.de>,
stable@vger.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org,
llvm@lists.linux.dev
Subject: Re: Apply d799769188529abc6cbf035a10087a51f7832b6b to 5.17 and 5.15?
Date: Thu, 21 Apr 2022 17:46:52 +1000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <877d7ig9oz.fsf@mpe.ellerman.id.au> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Yl8pNxSGUgeHZ1FT@dev-arch.thelio-3990X>
Nathan Chancellor <nathan@kernel.org> writes:
> Hi Greg, Sasha, and Michael,
>
> Commit d79976918852 ("powerpc/64: Add UADDR64 relocation support") fixes
> a boot failure with CONFIG_RELOCATABLE=y kernels linked with recent
> versions of ld.lld [1]. Additionally, it resolves a separate boot
> failure that Paul Menzel reported [2] with ld.lld 13.0.0. Is this a
> reasonable backport for 5.17 and 5.15? It applies cleanly, resolves both
> problems, and does not appear to cause any other issues in my testing
> for both trees but I was curious what Michael's opinion was, as I am far
> from a PowerPC expert.
>
> This change does apply cleanly to 5.10 (I did not try earlier branches)
> but there are other changes needed for ld.lld to link CONFIG_RELOCATABLE
> kernels in that branch so to avoid any regressions, I think it is safe
> to just focus on 5.15 and 5.17.
I considered tagging it for stable, but I wanted it to get a bit of
testing first, it's a reasonably big patch.
I think we're reasonably confident it doesn't introduce any new bugs,
but more testing time is always good.
So I guess I'd be inclined to wait another week or so before requesting
a stable backport?
cheers
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au>
To: Nathan Chancellor <nathan@kernel.org>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>
Cc: Paul Menzel <pmenzel@molgen.mpg.de>, Tom Rix <trix@redhat.com>,
llvm@lists.linux.dev, Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@google.com>,
stable@vger.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org
Subject: Re: Apply d799769188529abc6cbf035a10087a51f7832b6b to 5.17 and 5.15?
Date: Thu, 21 Apr 2022 17:46:52 +1000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <877d7ig9oz.fsf@mpe.ellerman.id.au> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Yl8pNxSGUgeHZ1FT@dev-arch.thelio-3990X>
Nathan Chancellor <nathan@kernel.org> writes:
> Hi Greg, Sasha, and Michael,
>
> Commit d79976918852 ("powerpc/64: Add UADDR64 relocation support") fixes
> a boot failure with CONFIG_RELOCATABLE=y kernels linked with recent
> versions of ld.lld [1]. Additionally, it resolves a separate boot
> failure that Paul Menzel reported [2] with ld.lld 13.0.0. Is this a
> reasonable backport for 5.17 and 5.15? It applies cleanly, resolves both
> problems, and does not appear to cause any other issues in my testing
> for both trees but I was curious what Michael's opinion was, as I am far
> from a PowerPC expert.
>
> This change does apply cleanly to 5.10 (I did not try earlier branches)
> but there are other changes needed for ld.lld to link CONFIG_RELOCATABLE
> kernels in that branch so to avoid any regressions, I think it is safe
> to just focus on 5.15 and 5.17.
I considered tagging it for stable, but I wanted it to get a bit of
testing first, it's a reasonably big patch.
I think we're reasonably confident it doesn't introduce any new bugs,
but more testing time is always good.
So I guess I'd be inclined to wait another week or so before requesting
a stable backport?
cheers
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-04-21 7:53 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-04-19 21:27 Apply d799769188529abc6cbf035a10087a51f7832b6b to 5.17 and 5.15? Nathan Chancellor
2022-04-19 21:27 ` Nathan Chancellor
2022-04-21 7:46 ` Michael Ellerman [this message]
2022-04-21 7:46 ` Michael Ellerman
2022-04-21 15:13 ` Nathan Chancellor
2022-04-21 15:13 ` Nathan Chancellor
2022-04-22 5:41 ` Michael Ellerman
2022-04-22 5:41 ` Michael Ellerman
2022-05-03 21:34 ` Nathan Chancellor
2022-05-03 21:34 ` Nathan Chancellor
2022-05-04 3:19 ` Michael Ellerman
2022-05-04 3:19 ` Michael Ellerman
2022-05-04 15:07 ` Greg Kroah-Hartman
2022-05-04 15:07 ` Greg Kroah-Hartman
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=877d7ig9oz.fsf@mpe.ellerman.id.au \
--to=mpe@ellerman.id.au \
--cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
--cc=llvm@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=nathan@kernel.org \
--cc=ndesaulniers@google.com \
--cc=pmenzel@molgen.mpg.de \
--cc=sashal@kernel.org \
--cc=stable@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=trix@redhat.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.