Commit dd2d082b5760 ("riscv: Cleanup setup_bootmem()") adjusted
the calling sequence in setup_bootmem(), which invalidates the fix
commit de043da0b9e7 ("RISC-V: Fix usage of memblock_enforce_memory_limit")
did for 32-bit RISC-V unfortunately.
So now 32-bit RISC-V does not boot again when testing booting kernel
on QEMU 'virt' with '-m 2G', which was exactly what the original
commit de043da0b9e7 ("RISC-V: Fix usage of memblock_enforce_memory_limit")
tried to fix.
Fixes: dd2d082b5760 ("riscv: Cleanup setup_bootmem()")
Cc: [email protected] # v5.12+
Signed-off-by: Bin Meng <[email protected]>
---
arch/riscv/mm/init.c | 4 +++-
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/arch/riscv/mm/init.c b/arch/riscv/mm/init.c
index 4c4c92ce0bb8..9b23b95c50cf 100644
--- a/arch/riscv/mm/init.c
+++ b/arch/riscv/mm/init.c
@@ -123,7 +123,7 @@ void __init setup_bootmem(void)
{
phys_addr_t vmlinux_end = __pa_symbol(&_end);
phys_addr_t vmlinux_start = __pa_symbol(&_start);
- phys_addr_t dram_end = memblock_end_of_DRAM();
+ phys_addr_t dram_end;
phys_addr_t max_mapped_addr = __pa(~(ulong)0);
#ifdef CONFIG_XIP_KERNEL
@@ -146,6 +146,8 @@ void __init setup_bootmem(void)
#endif
memblock_reserve(vmlinux_start, vmlinux_end - vmlinux_start);
+ dram_end = memblock_end_of_DRAM();
+
/*
* memblock allocator is not aware of the fact that last 4K bytes of
* the addressable memory can not be mapped because of IS_ERR_VALUE
--
2.25.1
Hi， sorry for the mistake，the bug is fixed by
https://lore.kernel.org/linux-riscv/[email protected]/
On 2021/6/27 21:51, Bin Meng wrote:
> Commit dd2d082b5760 ("riscv: Cleanup setup_bootmem()") adjusted
> the calling sequence in setup_bootmem(), which invalidates the fix
> commit de043da0b9e7 ("RISC-V: Fix usage of memblock_enforce_memory_limit")
> did for 32-bit RISC-V unfortunately.
>
> So now 32-bit RISC-V does not boot again when testing booting kernel
> on QEMU 'virt' with '-m 2G', which was exactly what the original
> commit de043da0b9e7 ("RISC-V: Fix usage of memblock_enforce_memory_limit")
> tried to fix.
>
> Fixes: dd2d082b5760 ("riscv: Cleanup setup_bootmem()")
> Cc: [email protected] # v5.12+
> Signed-off-by: Bin Meng <[email protected]>
> ---
>
> arch/riscv/mm/init.c | 4 +++-
> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/riscv/mm/init.c b/arch/riscv/mm/init.c
> index 4c4c92ce0bb8..9b23b95c50cf 100644
> --- a/arch/riscv/mm/init.c
> +++ b/arch/riscv/mm/init.c
> @@ -123,7 +123,7 @@ void __init setup_bootmem(void)
> {
> phys_addr_t vmlinux_end = __pa_symbol(&_end);
> phys_addr_t vmlinux_start = __pa_symbol(&_start);
> - phys_addr_t dram_end = memblock_end_of_DRAM();
> + phys_addr_t dram_end;
> phys_addr_t max_mapped_addr = __pa(~(ulong)0);
>
> #ifdef CONFIG_XIP_KERNEL
> @@ -146,6 +146,8 @@ void __init setup_bootmem(void)
> #endif
> memblock_reserve(vmlinux_start, vmlinux_end - vmlinux_start);
>
> + dram_end = memblock_end_of_DRAM();
> +
> /*
> * memblock allocator is not aware of the fact that last 4K bytes of
> * the addressable memory can not be mapped because of IS_ERR_VALUE
On Mon, Jun 28, 2021 at 8:53 AM Kefeng Wang <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Hi， sorry for the mistake，the bug is fixed by
>
> https://lore.kernel.org/linux-riscv/[email protected]/
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 [email protected] cc'ed
because 32-bit is broken since v5.12.
Regards,
Bin
On 2021/6/28 9:15, Bin Meng wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 28, 2021 at 8:53 AM Kefeng Wang <[email protected]> wrote:
>> Hi， sorry for the mistake，the bug is fixed by
>>
>> https://lore.kernel.org/linux-riscv/[email protected]/
> 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 [email protected] 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.
Hi Palmer, should I resend or could you help me to add the fixes tag?
>
> Regards,
> Bin
>
> _______________________________________________
> linux-riscv mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-riscv
On Mon, Jun 28, 2021 at 10:28 AM Kefeng Wang <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
> On 2021/6/28 9:15, Bin Meng wrote:
> > On Mon, Jun 28, 2021 at 8:53 AM Kefeng Wang <[email protected]> wrote:
> >> Hi， sorry for the mistake，the bug is fixed by
> >>
> >> https://lore.kernel.org/linux-riscv/[email protected]/
> > 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 [email protected] 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?
Regards,
Bin
On Mon, Jun 28, 2021 at 11:21 AM Bin Meng <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Jun 28, 2021 at 10:28 AM Kefeng Wang <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> >
> > On 2021/6/28 9:15, Bin Meng wrote:
> > > On Mon, Jun 28, 2021 at 8:53 AM Kefeng Wang <[email protected]> wrote:
> > >> Hi， sorry for the mistake，the bug is fixed by
> > >>
> > >> https://lore.kernel.org/linux-riscv/[email protected]/
> > > 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 [email protected] 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
On 2021/6/30 19:58, Bin Meng wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 28, 2021 at 11:21 AM Bin Meng <[email protected]> wrote:
>> On Mon, Jun 28, 2021 at 10:28 AM Kefeng Wang <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>> On 2021/6/28 9:15, Bin Meng wrote:
>>>> On Mon, Jun 28, 2021 at 8:53 AM Kefeng Wang <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>> Hi， sorry for the mistake，the bug is fixed by
>>>>>
>>>>> https://lore.kernel.org/linux-riscv/[email protected]/
>>>> 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 [email protected] 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.
"mem=" will change the range of memblock, so the fix part must be included.
>
> 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.
It is not a big problem for me, but I have no right abourt riscv-next,
let's wait Palmer's advise.
>
> Regards,
> Bin
>
> _______________________________________________
> linux-riscv mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-riscv
On Thu, Jul 1, 2021 at 10:08 AM Kefeng Wang <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
> On 2021/6/30 19:58, Bin Meng wrote:
> > On Mon, Jun 28, 2021 at 11:21 AM Bin Meng <[email protected]> wrote:
> >> On Mon, Jun 28, 2021 at 10:28 AM Kefeng Wang <[email protected]> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> On 2021/6/28 9:15, Bin Meng wrote:
> >>>> On Mon, Jun 28, 2021 at 8:53 AM Kefeng Wang <[email protected]> wrote:
> >>>>> Hi， sorry for the mistake，the bug is fixed by
> >>>>>
> >>>>> https://lore.kernel.org/linux-riscv/[email protected]/
> >>>> 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 [email protected] 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.
>
> "mem=" will change the range of memblock, so the fix part must be included.
>
Yes, so you can rebase the "mem=" changes on top of my patch.
The practice is that we should not mix 2 things in one patch. I can
imagine that you wanted to add "mem=" to RISC-V and suddenly found the
existing logic was broken, so you sent one patch to do both.
>
> >
> > 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.
>
> It is not a big problem for me, but I have no right abourt riscv-next,
>
> let's wait Palmer's advise.
>
Sure. Palmer, let me know your thoughts.
Regards,
Bin
Hi Palmer,
On Thu, Jul 1, 2021 at 10:20 AM Bin Meng <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Jul 1, 2021 at 10:08 AM Kefeng Wang <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> >
> > On 2021/6/30 19:58, Bin Meng wrote:
> > > On Mon, Jun 28, 2021 at 11:21 AM Bin Meng <[email protected]> wrote:
> > >> On Mon, Jun 28, 2021 at 10:28 AM Kefeng Wang <[email protected]> wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>> On 2021/6/28 9:15, Bin Meng wrote:
> > >>>> On Mon, Jun 28, 2021 at 8:53 AM Kefeng Wang <[email protected]> wrote:
> > >>>>> Hi， sorry for the mistake，the bug is fixed by
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> https://lore.kernel.org/linux-riscv/[email protected]/
> > >>>> 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 [email protected] 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.
> >
> > "mem=" will change the range of memblock, so the fix part must be included.
> >
>
> Yes, so you can rebase the "mem=" changes on top of my patch.
>
> The practice is that we should not mix 2 things in one patch. I can
> imagine that you wanted to add "mem=" to RISC-V and suddenly found the
> existing logic was broken, so you sent one patch to do both.
>
> >
> > >
> > > 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.
> >
> > It is not a big problem for me, but I have no right abourt riscv-next,
> >
> > let's wait Palmer's advise.
> >
>
> Sure. Palmer, let me know your thoughts.
Ping?
Regards,
Bin
On Thu, Jul 8, 2021 at 9:29 PM Bin Meng <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Hi Palmer,
>
> On Thu, Jul 1, 2021 at 10:20 AM Bin Meng <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, Jul 1, 2021 at 10:08 AM Kefeng Wang <[email protected]> wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > On 2021/6/30 19:58, Bin Meng wrote:
> > > > On Mon, Jun 28, 2021 at 11:21 AM Bin Meng <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > >> On Mon, Jun 28, 2021 at 10:28 AM Kefeng Wang <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > >>>
> > > >>> On 2021/6/28 9:15, Bin Meng wrote:
> > > >>>> On Mon, Jun 28, 2021 at 8:53 AM Kefeng Wang <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > >>>>> Hi， sorry for the mistake，the bug is fixed by
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>> https://lore.kernel.org/linux-riscv/[email protected]/
> > > >>>> 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 [email protected] 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.
> > >
> > > "mem=" will change the range of memblock, so the fix part must be included.
> > >
> >
> > Yes, so you can rebase the "mem=" changes on top of my patch.
> >
> > The practice is that we should not mix 2 things in one patch. I can
> > imagine that you wanted to add "mem=" to RISC-V and suddenly found the
> > existing logic was broken, so you sent one patch to do both.
> >
> > >
> > > >
> > > > 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.
> > >
> > > It is not a big problem for me, but I have no right abourt riscv-next,
> > >
> > > let's wait Palmer's advise.
> > >
> >
> > Sure. Palmer, let me know your thoughts.
>
> Ping?
Ping?
On Thu, 15 Jul 2021 19:14:20 PDT (-0700), [email protected] wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 8, 2021 at 9:29 PM Bin Meng <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> Hi Palmer,
>>
>> On Thu, Jul 1, 2021 at 10:20 AM Bin Meng <[email protected]> wrote:
>> >
>> > On Thu, Jul 1, 2021 at 10:08 AM Kefeng Wang <[email protected]> wrote:
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > On 2021/6/30 19:58, Bin Meng wrote:
>> > > > On Mon, Jun 28, 2021 at 11:21 AM Bin Meng <[email protected]> wrote:
>> > > >> On Mon, Jun 28, 2021 at 10:28 AM Kefeng Wang <[email protected]> wrote:
>> > > >>>
>> > > >>> On 2021/6/28 9:15, Bin Meng wrote:
>> > > >>>> On Mon, Jun 28, 2021 at 8:53 AM Kefeng Wang <[email protected]> wrote:
>> > > >>>>> Hi， sorry for the mistake，the bug is fixed by
>> > > >>>>>
>> > > >>>>> https://lore.kernel.org/linux-riscv/[email protected]/
>> > > >>>> 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 [email protected] 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.
>> > >
>> > > "mem=" will change the range of memblock, so the fix part must be included.
>> > >
>> >
>> > Yes, so you can rebase the "mem=" changes on top of my patch.
>> >
>> > The practice is that we should not mix 2 things in one patch. I can
>> > imagine that you wanted to add "mem=" to RISC-V and suddenly found the
>> > existing logic was broken, so you sent one patch to do both.
>> >
>> > >
>> > > >
>> > > > 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.
>> > >
>> > > It is not a big problem for me, but I have no right abourt riscv-next,
>> > >
>> > > let's wait Palmer's advise.
>> > >
>> >
>> > Sure. Palmer, let me know your thoughts.
>>
>> Ping?
>
> Ping?
Sorry, I missed this one. It looks like the patch that adds mem= and
fixes the bug has already been merged, so I'm not really quite sure what
the right thing to do is here: we don't really want the mem= code on
stable, but we do want the fix. I went ahead and did
commit 444818b599189fd8b6c814da542ff8cfc9fe67d4 (HEAD -> fixes, palmer/fixes)
gpg: Signature made Wed 21 Jul 2021 10:21:05 PM PDT
gpg: using RSA key 2B3C3747446843B24A943A7A2E1319F35FBB1889
gpg: issuer "[email protected]"
gpg: Good signature from "Palmer Dabbelt <[email protected]>" [ultimate]
gpg: aka "Palmer Dabbelt <[email protected]>" [ultimate]
Merge: e73f0f0ee754 d0e4dae74470
Author: Palmer Dabbelt <[email protected]>
Date: Wed Jul 21 22:18:58 2021 -0700
Merge remote-tracking branch 'riscv/riscv-fix-32bit' into fixes
This contains a single fix for 32-bit boot. It happens this was already
fixed by c9811e379b21 ("riscv: Add mem kernel parameter support"), but
the bug existed before that feature addition so I've applied the patch
earlier and then merged it in (which results in a conflict, which is
fixed via not changing the resulting tree).
* riscv/riscv-fix-32bit:
riscv: Fix 32-bit RISC-V boot failure
as that"s the best I could come up with -- then the fix will land on
master, which should cause it to get pulled onto stable.
Greg: is there a better way to make something like this get to stable?
On Thu, Jul 22, 2021 at 1:53 PM Palmer Dabbelt <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> On Thu, 15 Jul 2021 19:14:20 PDT (-0700), [email protected] wrote:
> > On Thu, Jul 8, 2021 at 9:29 PM Bin Meng <[email protected]> wrote:
> >>
> >> Hi Palmer,
> >>
> >> On Thu, Jul 1, 2021 at 10:20 AM Bin Meng <[email protected]> wrote:
> >> >
> >> > On Thu, Jul 1, 2021 at 10:08 AM Kefeng Wang <[email protected]> wrote:
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > > On 2021/6/30 19:58, Bin Meng wrote:
> >> > > > On Mon, Jun 28, 2021 at 11:21 AM Bin Meng <[email protected]> wrote:
> >> > > >> On Mon, Jun 28, 2021 at 10:28 AM Kefeng Wang <[email protected]> wrote:
> >> > > >>>
> >> > > >>> On 2021/6/28 9:15, Bin Meng wrote:
> >> > > >>>> On Mon, Jun 28, 2021 at 8:53 AM Kefeng Wang <[email protected]> wrote:
> >> > > >>>>> Hi， sorry for the mistake，the bug is fixed by
> >> > > >>>>>
> >> > > >>>>> https://lore.kernel.org/linux-riscv/[email protected]/
> >> > > >>>> 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 [email protected] 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.
> >> > >
> >> > > "mem=" will change the range of memblock, so the fix part must be included.
> >> > >
> >> >
> >> > Yes, so you can rebase the "mem=" changes on top of my patch.
> >> >
> >> > The practice is that we should not mix 2 things in one patch. I can
> >> > imagine that you wanted to add "mem=" to RISC-V and suddenly found the
> >> > existing logic was broken, so you sent one patch to do both.
> >> >
> >> > >
> >> > > >
> >> > > > 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.
> >> > >
> >> > > It is not a big problem for me, but I have no right abourt riscv-next,
> >> > >
> >> > > let's wait Palmer's advise.
> >> > >
> >> >
> >> > Sure. Palmer, let me know your thoughts.
> >>
> >> Ping?
> >
> > Ping?
>
> Sorry, I missed this one. It looks like the patch that adds mem= and
> fixes the bug has already been merged, so I'm not really quite sure what
> the right thing to do is here: we don't really want the mem= code on
> stable, but we do want the fix. I went ahead and did
>
> commit 444818b599189fd8b6c814da542ff8cfc9fe67d4 (HEAD -> fixes, palmer/fixes)
> gpg: Signature made Wed 21 Jul 2021 10:21:05 PM PDT
> gpg: using RSA key 2B3C3747446843B24A943A7A2E1319F35FBB1889
> gpg: issuer "[email protected]"
> gpg: Good signature from "Palmer Dabbelt <[email protected]>" [ultimate]
> gpg: aka "Palmer Dabbelt <[email protected]>" [ultimate]
> Merge: e73f0f0ee754 d0e4dae74470
> Author: Palmer Dabbelt <[email protected]>
> Date: Wed Jul 21 22:18:58 2021 -0700
>
> Merge remote-tracking branch 'riscv/riscv-fix-32bit' into fixes
>
> This contains a single fix for 32-bit boot. It happens this was already
> fixed by c9811e379b21 ("riscv: Add mem kernel parameter support"), but
> the bug existed before that feature addition so I've applied the patch
> earlier and then merged it in (which results in a conflict, which is
> fixed via not changing the resulting tree).
>
> * riscv/riscv-fix-32bit:
> riscv: Fix 32-bit RISC-V boot failure
>
> as that"s the best I could come up with -- then the fix will land on
> master, which should cause it to get pulled onto stable.
>
> Greg: is there a better way to make something like this get to stable?
We can:
1. git revert c9811e379b21 ("riscv: Add mem kernel parameter support")
2. git am <this patch>, cc stable
3. Kefeng resent a new patch that adds the mem kernel parameter
support, on top of mine
Regards,
Bin