From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Ralf Mardorf Subject: Re: RT patchset naming convention Date: Sat, 30 Dec 2017 06:27:18 +0100 Message-ID: <20171230062718.1454b6e8@archlinux.localdomain> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: linux-rt-users@vger.kernel.org Return-path: Received: from mail56c50.megamailservers.eu ([91.136.10.66]:49242 "EHLO mail56c50.megamailservers.eu" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750886AbdL3F1S (ORCPT ); Sat, 30 Dec 2017 00:27:18 -0500 Received: from archlinux.localdomain (x4e3215f7.dyn.telefonica.de [78.50.21.247]) (authenticated bits=0) by mail56c50.megamailservers.eu (8.14.9/8.13.1) with ESMTP id vBU5RFmo010073 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO) for ; Sat, 30 Dec 2017 05:27:16 +0000 In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-rt-users-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: This one didn't came through: Date: Sat, 30 Dec 2017 06:07:28 +0100 From: Ralf To: linux-rt-users Subject: Re: RT patchset naming convention On Fri, 29 Dec 2017 19:34:43 -0500, Patrick Doyle wrote: >Is there documentation as to the naming convention? >patches-4.9.61-rt61.tar.gz ^^^^^^ ^^^^rt patch version ^^^^^^kernel version https://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/v4.x/linux-4.9.tar.gz + https://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/v4.x/patch-4.9.61.gz or https://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/v4.x/linux-4.9.61.tar.gz Rt patches that fit to kernel 4.9.61 are all patches 4.9.61-rt* See also https://cdn.kernel.org/category/releases.html . >Sadly, I don't see any patches for any 4.9.5? releases. So is there >any advice as to which patch set I should apply to my kernel? Is there a good reason that has to be exactly 4.9.5? Why don't you follow the 4.9 LTS as close a s possible by upgrading to a kernel version close to an available rt patch. 4.9.73 is from 2017-12-29, see https://cdn.kernel.org/ , IOW I would go with kernel 4.9.68 and patch-4.9.68-rt60 If you really want 4.9.5 you could try to do it as Fernando from CCRMA does: https://lists.linuxaudio.org/pipermail/linux-audio-user/2017-December/109022.html That way a patch might apply automatically with an offset or you perhaps need to fix it manually.