Re: 2.6.14-rc4 patch audit
On Sat, Oct 15, 2005 at 06:02:53PM +0100, Mark Hymers wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I did a quick patch audit for 2.6.14-rc4 based on the 2.6.13-1 source
> tree and was asked on IRC to post it here so that it doesn't get lost.
Very very cool, it is work like this which will allow us to go forward and
maybe do 2.6.14-rc4 after -2 or in place of -2 even.
> Not applied upstream
> ====================
>
> drivers-scsi-megaraid_splitup.patch
> FAILS: 1 hunk (drivers/scsi/megaraid/Kconfig.megaraid)
>
> ia64-irq-affinity-upfix.patch
> FAILS 1 hunk (arch/ia64/kernel/irq.c)
>
> remove-references-to-removed-drivers.patch
> FAILS 1 hunk (drivers/usb/misc/Makefile)
These three need checking by someone else, i guess the
removed-reference-to-removed-drivers was doomed to fail, ia64 needs work
anyway, not sure about the megaraid issue though.
I will look over the following patches :
> powerpc-apus-todo.patch
> FAILS 1 hunk (include/video/vga.h)
This one is not applied at all and probably not needed, only there for
reference, until i have confirmation that it is not really needed.
> powerpc-g3-750cxe.patch
> Claims to already be applied
> Looks like patch is confused as a different but similar model was added
This one was indeed partly applied or applied in a different way, i will
investigate.
> powerpc-g4-l2-flush-errata.patch
> FAILS 1 hunk (arch/ppc/kernel/l2cr.S)
will fix.
> powerpc-serial-of.patch
> FAILS 1 hunk ignored (arch/ppc64/kernel/setup.c)
> This hunk claims to already be applied
>
> powerpc-serial.patch
> APPLIES Offset
Well, the second one is the one we use, while the first one is more able to go
upstream, will investigate. The first of the two is not currently applied
though.
In the light of this, i would indeed vote to move our package to 2.6.14-rc4
(versioned at 2.6.13.99.rc4 or something, and maybe with 2.6.14-0 abi name),
even for the -2 upload of wednesday, comments anyone ?
Friendly,
Sven Luther
Reply to: