[OpenWrt-Devel] [PATCH 2/4] kernel: add backported phy/phylink/sfp patches

[Russell King - ARM Linux admin]

On Tue, Nov 26, 2019 at 11:27:08PM +0000, Russell King - ARM Linux admin wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 26, 2019 at 03:11:55PM -0800, Etienne Champetier wrote:
> > Hello Russell,
> > 
> > Le mar. 26 nov. 2019 à 14:50, Russell King - ARM Linux admin
> > <linux at armlinux.org.uk> a écrit :
> > >
> > > On Tue, Nov 26, 2019 at 12:07:43AM +0000, Russell King - ARM Linux admin wrote:
> > > > René,
> > > >
> > > > I can see your reply in the OpenWrt archives, but I never received
> > > > it, so I can't reply to it...  (I'm not subscribed to openwrt-devel.)
> > > >
> > > > Yes, it could be made generic I suppose, if you understand the
> > > > OpenWrt build system and where stuff needs to be placed.  Any
> > > > suggestions where these should go?
> > > >
> > > > Sorry, but I've already spent many hours trying to get the OpenWrt
> > > > build system to a state that I was able to build just a kernel and
> > > > associated kmod packages that I don't have the patience to try and
> > > > delve into the amazingly complex makefiles that someone's dreamt up...
> > > > My impression is that the build system is designed to keep people out!
> > > >
> > > > Russell.
> > >
> > > All,
> > >
> > > Some guidance would be most helpful.  Silence on the other hand
> > > will result in nothing changing.
> > 
> > For faster response try IRC #openwrt-devel
> > 
> > > It's been suggested privately by Telus that they go in
> > > target/linux/generic/backport-4.19.  What about numbering, how
> > > do the patch numbers get allocated?  Do I just pick something at
> > > random?
> > >
> > > Some clues would be really useful.
> > 
> > This page might have some answers
> > https://openwrt.org/docs/guide-developer/build-system/use-patches-with-buildsystem#naming_patches
> 
> Great, exactly what I'm looking for!  Thanks.

So, I guess:

1) as these are touching phy code, using 7xx numbers would be
   reasonable  Or maybe 0xx for at least some?

2) there are no 7xx numbers in target/linux/generic/backport-4.19, so
   numbering them 700 through to 742 for the first patches would be
   okay?  These are all queued in mainline net-next.  Maybe 0xx, but
   do I just work around the numbering of the existing patches, starting
   from the first available number?  Or maybe 1xx as it hasn't yet been
   pushed into mainline?

3) patch 3 aren't queued yet, but are published in my git tree, and will
   be sent for the next merge window.  Does this still qualify as
   suitable for backport-4.19, or should they go elsewhere? 7xx or 1xx?
   They won't be pushed from OpenWrt upstream, but by me as mainline
   kernel SFP maintainer.

4) patch 4, the uDPU patches stay in target/linux/mvebu/patches-4.19?
   3xx or some other number?

5) the final patch, which isn't in mainline, and probably needs further
   work - should that go in target/linux/generic/hack-4.19 ?  What about
   the numbering of the existing 7xx patches there - do I just pick the
   first available 7xx number, i.o.w. 701 ?

Any help gratefully received.  Thanks.

-- 
RMK's Patch system: https://www.armlinux.org.uk/developer/patches/
FTTC broadband for 0.8mile line in suburbia: sync at 12.1Mbps down 622kbps up
According to speedtest.net: 11.9Mbps down 500kbps up

_______________________________________________
openwrt-devel mailing list
openwrt-devel at lists.openwrt.org
https://lists.openwrt.org/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-devel