linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH -next v8 0/2] support allocating crashkernel above 4G explicitly on riscv

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <43731b35-c076-6d01-ad83-764fb2e9a8f0@huawei.com>
Date:   Wed, 26 Jul 2023 17:30:49 +0800
From:   "chenjiahao (C)" <chenjiahao16@...wei.com>
To:     Conor Dooley <conor.dooley@...rochip.com>
CC:     Conor Dooley <conor@...nel.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        <linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org>, <kexec@...ts.infradead.org>,
        <linux-doc@...r.kernel.org>, <paul.walmsley@...ive.com>,
        <palmer@...belt.com>, <guoren@...nel.org>, <heiko@...ech.de>,
        <bjorn@...osinc.com>, <alex@...ti.fr>, <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        <atishp@...osinc.com>, <bhe@...hat.com>,
        <thunder.leizhen@...wei.com>, <horms@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH -next v8 0/2] support allocating crashkernel above 4G
 explicitly on riscv


On 2023/7/26 14:45, Conor Dooley wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 26, 2023 at 10:20:00AM +0800, chenjiahao (C) wrote:
>> On 2023/7/26 5:48, Conor Dooley wrote:
>>> Hey,
>>>
>>> Your $subject says -next, but the patch failed to apply to
>>> riscv/for-next. What was the base for this patchset?
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Conor.
>> Hi,
>>
>> My patchset was tested on current linux-next HEAD
>> (commit ID: 1e25dd777248, tag: next-20230725) and
>> it seems all ok.
>> Could you try applying with the base above, or
>> is there any problem with that base?
> There's some difference between linux-next and riscv/for-next that
> prevents the patchwork automation from applying the patches.

Oh, I see. There is definitely a difference, since linux-next applied
a bugfix patch b690e266dae2 ("riscv: mm: fix truncation warning on RV32")
recently, whereas riscv/for-next didn't. I have worked on a wrong base
and thanks for reminding :)

I will rebase onto riscv/for-next and post my v9 pathset soon, please
check over there.

Thanks,
Jiahao