Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20210627135117.28641-1-bmeng.cn@gmail.com> <11706f7e-a53a-5640-d713-bc4562db71fa@huawei.com>
 <CAEUhbmV=h3nZ8Aa94_uyjrZ_NGe+9-xAorUMubSPJXu3y60PeQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <aa1f027c-bbc7-92f8-80a6-fe290cd1cdf8@huawei.com> <CAEUhbmXeqAsLxm+oCHRPHMZq2mQXPD6fJOFerwp_BRv1kCc7ow@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAEUhbmXeqAsLxm+oCHRPHMZq2mQXPD6fJOFerwp_BRv1kCc7ow@mail.gmail.com>
From:   Bin Meng <bmeng.cn@gmail.com>
Date:   Wed, 30 Jun 2021 19:58:39 +0800
Message-ID: <CAEUhbmUvDSocWobb26PcrV6vi6kHjg8o6pNomt9AnGWGbvAuhw@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] riscv: Fix 32-bit RISC-V boot failure
To:     Kefeng Wang <wangkefeng.wang@huawei.com>
Cc:     Palmer Dabbelt <palmerdabbelt@google.com>,
        Atish Patra <atish.patra@wdc.com>,
        linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        linux-riscv <linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org>,
        stable <stable@vger.kernel.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Precedence: bulk

On Mon, Jun 28, 2021 at 11:21 AM Bin Meng <bmeng.cn@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Jun 28, 2021 at 10:28 AM Kefeng Wang <wangkefeng.wang@huawei.com>=
 wrote:
> >
> >
> > On 2021/6/28 9:15, Bin Meng wrote:
> > > On Mon, Jun 28, 2021 at 8:53 AM Kefeng Wang <wangkefeng.wang@huawei.c=
om> wrote:
> > >> Hi=EF=BC=8C sorry for the mistake=EF=BC=8Cthe bug is fixed by
> > >>
> > >> https://lore.kernel.org/linux-riscv/20210602085517.127481-2-wangkefe=
ng.wang@huawei.com/
> > > What are we on the patch you mentioned?
> > >
> > > I don't see it applied in the linux/master.
> > >
> > > Also there should be a "Fixes" tag and stable@vger.kernel.org cc'ed
> > > because 32-bit is broken since v5.12.
> >
> > https://kernel.googlesource.com/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/riscv/linux/+/=
c9811e379b211c67ba29fb09d6f644dd44cfcff2
> >
> > it's on Palmer' riscv-next.
>
> Not sure riscv-next is for which release? This is a regression and
> should be on 5.13.
>
> >
> > Hi Palmer, should I resend or could you help me to add the fixes tag?

Your patch mixed 2 things (fix plus one feature) together, so it is
not proper to back port your patch.

Here is my 2 cents:

1. Drop your patch from riscv-next
2. Apply my patch as it is a simple fix to previous commit. This
allows stable kernel to cherry-pick the fix to v5.12 and v5.13.
3. Rebase your patch against mine, and resend v2

Let me know if this makes sense.

Regards,
Bin