From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail-wr1-f44.google.com (mail-wr1-f44.google.com [209.85.221.44]) by mx.groups.io with SMTP id smtpd.web09.10781.1608393128341331842 for ; Sat, 19 Dec 2020 07:52:08 -0800 Authentication-Results: mx.groups.io; dkim=pass header.i=@linuxfoundation.org header.s=google header.b=eWBc4ixQ; spf=pass (domain: linuxfoundation.org, ip: 209.85.221.44, mailfrom: richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org) Received: by mail-wr1-f44.google.com with SMTP id a12so6238499wrv.8 for ; Sat, 19 Dec 2020 07:52:08 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linuxfoundation.org; s=google; h=message-id:subject:from:to:cc:date:in-reply-to:references :user-agent:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=62kLOWWoFN/hSAGp+oyyNvD+XexHL9Iupw0BAo1E/fM=; b=eWBc4ixQ14zOQIuwEz3fbcLrH6nBblousNTewY4R22+R1xTkrvGvlRrSg+7cFZ0CEj QKEuScicBrgj114+/5ioS8FFACjoSqCQUnBqh1ItPbJSA4HGqbI8ep1be5k3lSMTYuyq QoArgRIqYsbf+2HqldoEQJ8tsAv3GVtpQyFDE= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:date:in-reply-to :references:user-agent:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=62kLOWWoFN/hSAGp+oyyNvD+XexHL9Iupw0BAo1E/fM=; b=g3m8O3M3zC2IEsvpKqehKnlsIASJnSZnjyadW4sF95GNcSGzPs87msbLlPeR10Y7ec oCx/OJyEl5Sux0KfVL/pEhLinb4ymSBNbFe8TtSEkJQdu/GGNIxgvGbLyFNDM/U7x2E4 AGm/ZAWBFGRZ+o5pJLtuMV+1RAhNztX3mdpbdwkRMDCjOZx8n2Mv3hnC2DjbagKVA7xc JfEzeOBcz59k3pGYb8vElEGtlsNbhhc3d2W22CiNYuXDsdp0JhUwp+G4aQpy+3qPK0bD KCYsl0KkzuBfGMVAchL3tZD2lcGcN23rZ/a8wN8DvngxwoFtTUY2gbwrWA47TIu8wDJv HK2Q== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530dWM3iIsotJb12hXuQYIYZGWA0XcZIq3+3zV3WmSMwpNu7ctdZ NPYXMhoHj0wfoQfvaMzwLuDnfw== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwkKztxOpnuf5N2VfkzyFVKJTDPfwiQBVIAA9DYGOCGdzcNKYeF7Z1l4610siLGn7cJA5nFAQ== X-Received: by 2002:adf:eec7:: with SMTP id a7mr10008854wrp.45.1608393127007; Sat, 19 Dec 2020 07:52:07 -0800 (PST) Return-Path: Received: from 4.4.0.a.d.7.7.1.7.c.4.b.2.1.9.0.c.3.f.5.a.b.a.0.0.b.8.0.1.0.0.2.ip6.arpa (4.4.0.a.d.7.7.1.7.c.4.b.2.1.9.0.c.3.f.5.a.b.a.0.0.b.8.0.1.0.0.2.ip6.arpa. [2001:8b0:aba:5f3c:912:b4c7:177d:a044]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id h20sm19446580wrb.21.2020.12.19.07.52.06 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Sat, 19 Dec 2020 07:52:06 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/8] linux-yocto: consolidated pull requesrt From: "Richard Purdie" To: Bruce Ashfield Cc: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer , Paul Eggleton Date: Sat, 19 Dec 2020 15:52:05 +0000 In-Reply-To: References: User-Agent: Evolution 3.36.4-0ubuntu1 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On Sat, 2020-12-19 at 10:48 -0500, Bruce Ashfield wrote: > On Sat, Dec 19, 2020 at 6:31 AM Richard Purdie > wrote: > > Hi Bruce, > > > > On Mon, 2020-12-14 at 10:09 -0500, bruce.ashfield@gmail.com wrote: > > > From: Bruce Ashfield > > > > > > 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