On Wed, 19 Mar 2025 10:28:53 +0100, Jiri Slaby (SUSE) wrote:
> tl;dr if patches are agreed upon, I ask subsys maintainers to take the
> respective ones via their trees (as they are split per subsys), so that
> the IRQ tree can take only the rest. That would minimize churn/conflicts
> during merges.
> * fix alignment in allocation of zero pages on s390
> * add Acked-by
This resolves the issues for 32 bit arm, at least the v7 boards:
Tested-by: Mark Brown
My v5 and v6 boards are having issues but I think that's unrelated
infrastructure (in one case definitely so).
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
On Tue, Mar 11, 2025 at 10:41:28PM +0100, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> On Tue, 11 Mar 2025 at 22:33, Mark Brown wrote:
> > [0.00] efi: UEFI not found.
> > [0.00] cma: Reserved 64 MiB at 0x
> > - I'd only been sampling the logs for the physical pl
On Tue, Mar 11, 2025 at 11:06:56PM +0200, Mike Rapoport wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 11, 2025 at 05:51:06PM +0000, Mark Brown wrote:
> > This patch appears to be causing breakage on a number of 32 bit arm
> > platforms, including qemu's virt-2.11,gic-version=3. Affected platforms
>
On Thu, Mar 06, 2025 at 08:51:20PM +0200, Mike Rapoport wrote:
> From: "Mike Rapoport (Microsoft)"
>
> high_memory defines upper bound on the directly mapped memory.
> This bound is defined by the beginning of ZONE_HIGHMEM when a system has
> high memory and by the end of memory otherwise.
>
> A
On Tue, Mar 12, 2024 at 03:41:32PM +0100, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 21, 2024 at 3:06 PM Rob Herring wrote:
> static int __init regulator_init_complete(void)
> {
> /*
> * Since DT doesn't provide an idiomatic mechanism for
> * enabling fu
On Mon, Jul 17, 2023 at 03:55:50PM +, Edgecombe, Rick P wrote:
> On Fri, 2023-07-14 at 23:57 +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
> > The same issue seems to apply with the version that was in -next
> > based
> > on v6.4-rc4 too.
> The version in your branch is not the same as t
On Mon, Jun 12, 2023 at 05:10:27PM -0700, Rick Edgecombe wrote:
> The x86 Shadow stack feature includes a new type of memory called shadow
> stack. This shadow stack memory has some unusual properties, which requires
> some core mm changes to function properly.
This seems to break sparc64_defconfi
On Thu, Mar 23, 2023 at 09:31:10AM +0800, David Gow wrote:
> The most convenient workarounds (other than having newer gcc /
> binutils) are probably to either run against a different architecture
> (e.g. --arch x86_64) or to build with clang (--make_options LLVM=1).
> Those should be a bit more st
I've been trying to do some stuff with KUnit but I can't seem to
find a current tree where KUnit builds. Running on Debian stable
starting from a clean -next tree and running:
./tools/testing/kunit/kunit.py config
./tools/testing/kunit/kunit.py build
based on Documentation/dev-tools/kunit/
On Wed, Feb 08, 2023 at 03:12:06PM +0100, David Hildenbrand wrote:
> On 07.02.23 01:32, Mark Brown wrote:
> > Today's -next (and at least back to Friday, older logs are unclear - I
> > only noticed -next issues today) fails to NFS boot on an AT91SAM9G20-EK
> > (a
On Fri, Jan 13, 2023 at 06:10:04PM +0100, David Hildenbrand wrote:
> Let's support __HAVE_ARCH_PTE_SWP_EXCLUSIVE by stealing one bit from the
> offset. This reduces the maximum swap space per file to 64 GiB (was 128
> GiB).
>
> While at it drop the PTE_TYPE_FAULT from __swp_entry_to_pte() which is
On Thu, Mar 17, 2022 at 04:13:26PM +0100, Vincent Whitchurch wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 11, 2022 at 06:06:54PM +0000, Mark Brown wrote:
> > > +@classmethod
> > > +def setUpClass(cls) -> None:
> > > +insmod("tps6286x-regulator")
> > Sh
On Fri, Mar 11, 2022 at 05:24:44PM +0100, Vincent Whitchurch wrote:
This looks like it could be useful, modulo the general concerns with
mocking stuff. I've not looked at the broader framework stuff in any
meanigful way.
> +@classmethod
> +def setUpClass(cls) -> None:
> +insmod("
14 matches
Mail list logo
