Re: [PATCH 0/8] linux-yocto: consolidated pull requesrt

["Richard Purdie" <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>]

On Sat, 2020-12-19 at 10:48 -0500, Bruce Ashfield wrote:
> On Sat, Dec 19, 2020 at 6:31 AM Richard Purdie
> <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> > Hi Bruce,
> > 
> > On Mon, 2020-12-14 at 10:09 -0500, bruce.ashfield@gmail.com wrote:
> > > From: Bruce Ashfield <bruce.ashfield@gmail.com>
> > > 
> > > 5.10 dropped this morning, so I'm switching over to the libc-headers
> > > and reference kernel upgrade (5.4 and 5.10 will be in master, with
> > > 5.8 being dropped).
> > > 
> > > But since that will take a bit to sort out, I wanted to send my queue
> > > of patches for other fixes/versions.
> > > 
> > > I didn't pick up any issues with local testing, so hopefully this
> > > won't
> > > cause any problems.
> > > 
> > > I have the lttng-modules patch from a previous send repeated here,
> > > since
> > > it may be easier to take it as part of the bulk update. I checked
> > > just a few minutes ago, and there isn't a new tagged version of the
> > > modules yet, so we still need the backported patches for 5.10+
> > > builds.
> > 
> > I was able to merge part of the series but there were some warnings
> > that came up:
> > 
> > meta-intel:
> > https://autobuilder.yoctoproject.org/typhoon/#/builders/100/builds/1020
> > poky-tiny:
> > https://autobuilder.yoctoproject.org/typhoon/#/builders/15/builds/3105
> > 
> > so I've deferred the kernel tooling bit until we can figure these out.
> > That means several other patches which depended on that also couldn't
> > make it in.
> 
> Nothing else should have depended on the kern-tools ones, it is independent
> of the rest. Either way, I'll submit next week!

The others don't rebase cleanly without it and I wasn't sure if
resolving the rejects was going to be a good or a bad idea so I replied
on list and asked :)

Its probably easier for us both if I wait but I can rebase if it makes
sense.

Cheers,

Richard