[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAK8P3a2Ud6iVEumhSzBpWwKN5SiuYOGSBT1ZAD=UiC8RNTv=SA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2017 11:42:39 +0100
From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
To: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
Cc: Ben Hutchings <ben@...adent.org.uk>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
stable@...r.kernel.org, linux-mips@...ux-mips.org,
Ralf Baechle <ralf@...ux-mips.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4.4 04/35] MIPS: Update defconfigs for NF_CT_PROTO_DCCP/UDPLITE
change
On Mon, Mar 20, 2017 at 11:30 AM, Greg Kroah-Hartman
<gregkh@...uxfoundation.org> wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 19, 2017 at 04:05:16PM +0000, Ben Hutchings wrote:
>> On Thu, 2017-03-16 at 23:29 +0900, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
>> > 4.4-stable review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let me know.
>> >
>> > ------------------
>> >
>> > From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
>> >
>> > commit 9ddc16ad8e0bc7742fc96d5aaabc5b8698512cd1 upstream.
>> >
>> > In linux-4.10-rc, NF_CT_PROTO_UDPLITE and NF_CT_PROTO_DCCP are bool
>> > symbols instead of tristate, and kernelci.org reports a bunch of
>> > warnings for this, like:
>> >
>> > arch/mips/configs/malta_kvm_guest_defconfig:63:warning: symbol value 'm' invalid for NF_CT_PROTO_UDPLITE
>> > arch/mips/configs/malta_defconfig:62:warning: symbol value 'm' invalid for NF_CT_PROTO_DCCP
>> > arch/mips/configs/malta_defconfig:63:warning: symbol value 'm' invalid for NF_CT_PROTO_UDPLITE
>> > arch/mips/configs/ip22_defconfig:70:warning: symbol value 'm' invalid for NF_CT_PROTO_DCCP
>> > arch/mips/configs/ip22_defconfig:71:warning: symbol value 'm' invalid for NF_CT_PROTO_UDPLITE
>> >
>> > This changes all the MIPS defconfigs with these symbols to have them
>> > built-in.
>> >
>> > Fixes: 9b91c96c5d1f ("netfilter: conntrack: built-in support for UDPlite")
>> > Fixes: c51d39010a1b ("netfilter: conntrack: built-in support for DCCP")
>> [...]
>>
>> I don't think this was needed for 4.4 or 4.9, as those symbols were
>> still tristate type.
>
> I don't know, Arnd was the one that reported it to me.
>
> Arnd?
I thought I had only reported it for the v4.10-stable tree. I was a bit vague
about which of the ones I reported were needed on older trees as well,
but the changelog text is fairly specific.
Arnd
Powered by blists - more mailing lists