From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail.linuxfoundation.org ([140.211.169.12]:53662 "EHLO mail.linuxfoundation.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755029AbdELKoX (ORCPT ); Fri, 12 May 2017 06:44:23 -0400 Date: Fri, 12 May 2017 12:44:13 +0200 From: Greg Kroah-Hartman To: Arnd Bergmann Cc: Tony Lindgren , Guenter Roeck , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Linus Torvalds , Andrew Morton , shuahkh@osg.samsung.com, patches@kernelci.org, ben.hutchings@codethink.co.uk, stable@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 3.18 00/39] 3.18.53-stable review Message-ID: <20170512104413.GC14054@kroah.com> References: <20170511130238.045434679@linuxfoundation.org> <20170511211607.GC12362@roeck-us.net> <20170511213122.gemj5buwrct2aemd@squirrel.local> <20170511214636.GC3489@atomide.com> <20170512093748.GA32014@kroah.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: stable-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Fri, May 12, 2017 at 12:15:10PM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > On Fri, May 12, 2017 at 11:37 AM, Greg Kroah-Hartman > wrote: > > On Thu, May 11, 2017 at 02:46:37PM -0700, Tony Lindgren wrote: > >> * Matthijs van Duin [170511 14:34]: > >> > On Thu, May 11, 2017 at 02:16:07PM -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote: > >> > > arch/arm/mach-omap2/omap-headsmp.S:60: Error: bad instruction `badr r0,hyp_boot' > >> > > > >> > > I see "badr" used in later kernels, but not in v3.18. Does this possibly > >> > > require some secondary patches ? > >> > > >> > It was introduced in kernel 4.2 by > >> > 14327c662822 "ARM: replace BSYM() with badr assembly macro" > >> > > >> > The correct backport would therefore just be: > >> > > >> > - adr r0, hyp_boot > >> > + adr r0, BSYM(hyp_boot) > >> > > >> > Right? > >> > >> Or just skip this for v3.18 until somebody actually needs thumb > >> kernel with hypervisor and can provide a Tested-by. > > > > Ok, I'll drop this patch for now, it was added to fix a build warning > > that Arnd found. I'll wait for a proper backport if people really get > > annoyed by it :) > > Are you sure it was one of mine? While it seems like an important > fix, I don't remember seeing it and it doesn't look like a warning fix > but a boot regression. > > If I did send you this commit ID, it was probably a mistake on my > end, but then I'd like to find out where I went wrong. Ok, no, this was my fault, it came from a list of patches I was digging through that went into 4.11 to see if they were applicable to older kernels as well. sorry for the noise, greg k-h