linux-kernel - Re: linux-next: manual merge of the net-next tree with the spacemit tree

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: <20250919092507-GYA1279412@gentoo.org>
Date: Fri, 19 Sep 2025 17:25:07 +0800
From: Yixun Lan <dlan@...too.org>
To: Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
Cc: Vivian Wang <wangruikang@...as.ac.cn>,
	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
	Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
	Alex Elder <elder@...cstar.com>,
	Networking <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
	Guodong Xu <guodong@...cstar.com>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Linux Next Mailing List <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>,
	soc@...nel.org
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the net-next tree with the spacemit
 tree

Hi Paolo, Mark, Arnd

I'd like to have your attentions, see below

On 20:59 Wed 17 Sep     , Yixun Lan wrote:
> Hi Mark,
> 
> On 20:30 Wed 17 Sep     , Yixun Lan wrote:
> > Hi Mark,
> > 
> > On 13:03 Wed 17 Sep     , Mark Brown wrote:
> > > On Wed, Sep 17, 2025 at 07:48:34PM +0800, Vivian Wang wrote:
> > > 
> > > > Just FYI, Yixun has proposed for net-next to back out of the DTS changes
> > > > and taking them up through the spacemit tree instead [1], resolving the
> > > > conflicts in the spacemit tree. This would certainly mean less headaches
> > > > while managing pull requests, as well as allowing Yixun to take care of
> > > > code style concerns like node order. However, I do not know what the
> > > > norms here are.
> > > 
> > > Thanks.  They're pretty trivial conflicts so I'm not sure it's critical,
> > > though like you say node order might easily end up the wrong way round
> > > depending on how the conflict resolution gets done.
> > 
> > Thanks for the help and fixing this, but ..
> > 
> > If it's possible to revert the DT patch 3-5, then I'd be happy to take,
> > but if this is too much job, e.g. the net-next's main branch is imuutable
> > and reverting it will cause too much trouble, then I'm fine with current
> > solution - carry the fix via net-next tree..
> > 
> > But please use commit: 0f084b221e2c5ba16eca85b3d2497f9486bd0329 of
> > https://github.com/spacemit-com/linux/tree/k1/dt-for-next as the merge
> > parent, which I'm about to send to Arnd (the SoC tree)
> > 
> No matter which way choose to go, I've created an immutable tag here,
> 
> https://github.com/spacemit-com/linux/ spacemit-dt-for-6.18-1
> 

I've sent out the PR of DT changes to SoC tree for inclusion, see 
https://lore.kernel.org/all/20250919055525-GYC5766558@gentoo.org/

There is a potential conflict with commit from net-next:
 e32dc7a936b11e437298bcc4601476befcbcb88f ("riscv: dts: spacemit: Add Ethernet support for Jupiter")

the conflict itself is quite trivial, and should be easy to fix, and I'm also
personally fine to have it solved in net-next tree if Arnd has no objection

But if need assistance from my side, just let me know - I can handle it
- if the ethernet DT patches can be reverted from net-next
- I can apply them at SpacemiT SoC tree
- send a incremental v2 PR to the SoC tree

> > BTW, The 'for-next' branch is a merged branch contains clock and DT patches
> > for SpacemiT SoC tree's which isn't immutable..
> > 
> > Let me know what I should proceed, thank you
> > 
> 

-- 
Yixun Lan (dlan)