[PATCH 3.10-stable] at91sam9x5 rtc causes damage

[PATCH 3.10-stable] at91sam9x5 rtc causes damage

[Douglas Gilbert]

This one probably needs more sign-offs but some folks seem to be
away. It is pretty simple and fixed in the current lk 3.11.0-rc
series. So it just impacts the lk 3.10 series including lk 3.10.5 .

ChangeLog:
   - without this patch members of the at91sam9x5 family (e.g.
     at91sam9g25) that use the RTC will receive an unhandled
     interrupt whenever they try to write to the RTC. In the
     case of 9x5 SoCs that is the SYS interrupt shared with
     several other things such as the debug port. Thereafter
     the debug port becomes useless (for input), the RTC doesn't
     work ...

Signed-off-by: Douglas Gilbert <dgilbert@interlog.com>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: sam9x5_rtc310a.patch
Type: text/x-patch
Size: 408 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-arm-kernel/attachments/20130807/ecd0d8e6/attachment.bin>

[PATCH 3.10-stable] at91sam9x5 rtc causes damage

[Greg KH]

On Wed, Aug 07, 2013 at 12:49:55PM -0400, Douglas Gilbert wrote:
> This one probably needs more sign-offs but some folks seem to be
> away. It is pretty simple and fixed in the current lk 3.11.0-rc
> series. So it just impacts the lk 3.10 series including lk 3.10.5 .
> 
> ChangeLog:
>   - without this patch members of the at91sam9x5 family (e.g.
>     at91sam9g25) that use the RTC will receive an unhandled
>     interrupt whenever they try to write to the RTC. In the
>     case of 9x5 SoCs that is the SYS interrupt shared with
>     several other things such as the debug port. Thereafter
>     the debug port becomes useless (for input), the RTC doesn't
>     work ...
> 
> Signed-off-by: Douglas Gilbert <dgilbert@interlog.com>

<formletter>

This is not the correct way to submit patches for inclusion in the
stable kernel tree.  Please read Documentation/stable_kernel_rules.txt
for how to do this properly.

</formletter>

[PATCH 3.10-stable] at91sam9x5 rtc causes damage

[Douglas Gilbert]

On 13-08-07 03:08 PM, Greg KH wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 07, 2013 at 12:49:55PM -0400, Douglas Gilbert wrote:
>> This one probably needs more sign-offs but some folks seem to be
>> away. It is pretty simple and fixed in the current lk 3.11.0-rc
>> series. So it just impacts the lk 3.10 series including lk 3.10.5 .
>>
>> ChangeLog:
>>    - without this patch members of the at91sam9x5 family (e.g.
>>      at91sam9g25) that use the RTC will receive an unhandled
>>      interrupt whenever they try to write to the RTC. In the
>>      case of 9x5 SoCs that is the SYS interrupt shared with
>>      several other things such as the debug port. Thereafter
>>      the debug port becomes useless (for input), the RTC doesn't
>>      work ...
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Douglas Gilbert <dgilbert@interlog.com>
>
> <formletter>
>
> This is not the correct way to submit patches for inclusion in the
> stable kernel tree.  Please read Documentation/stable_kernel_rules.txt
> for how to do this properly.
>
> </formletter>

Fine. I'll leave it.

Doug Gilbert

[PATCH 3.10-stable] at91sam9x5 rtc causes damage

[Greg KH]

On Wed, Aug 07, 2013 at 03:24:39PM -0400, Douglas Gilbert wrote:
> On 13-08-07 03:08 PM, Greg KH wrote:
> >On Wed, Aug 07, 2013 at 12:49:55PM -0400, Douglas Gilbert wrote:
> >>This one probably needs more sign-offs but some folks seem to be
> >>away. It is pretty simple and fixed in the current lk 3.11.0-rc
> >>series. So it just impacts the lk 3.10 series including lk 3.10.5 .
> >>
> >>ChangeLog:
> >>   - without this patch members of the at91sam9x5 family (e.g.
> >>     at91sam9g25) that use the RTC will receive an unhandled
> >>     interrupt whenever they try to write to the RTC. In the
> >>     case of 9x5 SoCs that is the SYS interrupt shared with
> >>     several other things such as the debug port. Thereafter
> >>     the debug port becomes useless (for input), the RTC doesn't
> >>     work ...
> >>
> >>Signed-off-by: Douglas Gilbert <dgilbert@interlog.com>
> >
> ><formletter>
> >
> >This is not the correct way to submit patches for inclusion in the
> >stable kernel tree.  Please read Documentation/stable_kernel_rules.txt
> >for how to do this properly.
> >
> ></formletter>
> 
> Fine. I'll leave it.

Leave what?  Did you read the above file that shows how to get a patch
into the stable tree?  Follow that and all should be fine.

thanks,

greg k-h