| Message ID | 20210707180016.21351-1-asmaa@nvidia.com |
|---|---|
| Headers | show |
| Series | UBUNTU: SAUCE: Sync up mlxbf-gige with upstreamed version | expand |
I think the best way to do this is to revert all 20 of the
drivers/net/ethernet/mellanox/mlxbf_gige SAUCE patches, then you should
be able to cherry-pick f92e1869d74e1acc6551256eb084a1c14a054e19 ("Add
Mellanox BlueField Gigabit Ethernet driver"). That will preserve the
provenance of the patch and make it clear it came from upstream.
Your next submission should also be a pull request given the number of
patches.
rtg
On 7/7/21 12:00 PM, Asmaa Mnebhi wrote:
> BugLink: https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1934923
>
> SRU Justification:
>
> [Impact]
>
> The mlxbf-gige driver has just been upstreamed so linux-bluefield needs to be synced up with what we have upstreamed.
>
> [Fix]
>
> * Cleaned up the gige driver as instructed by maintainers
> * removed dependency between the mlxbf-gige driver and gpio-mlxbf2 driver
> * updated the UEFI ACPI table to reflect the above changes
>
> [Test Case]
>
> * oob_net0 coming up after several SW_RESET or reboot
> * oob_net0 coming up after several powercycles
> * oob_net0 coming up after pushing a new Ubuntu/CentOS/Yocto
> * rmmod/modprove mlxbf_gige several times
> * OOB PXE boot multiple times from UEFI menu
> * automate OOB PXE boot and do reboot
> * automate OOB PXE boot and do powercycle
> * Test that GPIO7 reset still works on BlueSphere like boards
>
> [Regression Potential]
>
> Any of the test cases above could be impacted due to these new changes.
>
Hi Tim, That would mean I would have to submit multiple patches: 1) revert all 20 changes (which is time consuming) 2) cherry-pick from upstreaming 3) create a separate patch for the gpio driver 4) create a patch to add some code we left out of the upstreamed version So I would prefer it if we could keep this one patch but if you still think it is better, I will do it. Thanks. Asmaa -----Original Message----- From: Tim Gardner <tim.gardner@canonical.com> Sent: Wednesday, July 7, 2021 2:36 PM To: Asmaa Mnebhi <asmaa@nvidia.com>; kernel-team@lists.ubuntu.com Cc: Meriton Tuli <meriton@nvidia.com>; Khoa Vo <khoav@nvidia.com>; David Thompson <davthompson@nvidia.com> Subject: NAK: [SRU][F:linux-bluefield][PATCH v1 0/1] UBUNTU: SAUCE: Sync up mlxbf-gige with upstreamed version I think the best way to do this is to revert all 20 of the drivers/net/ethernet/mellanox/mlxbf_gige SAUCE patches, then you should be able to cherry-pick f92e1869d74e1acc6551256eb084a1c14a054e19 ("Add Mellanox BlueField Gigabit Ethernet driver"). That will preserve the provenance of the patch and make it clear it came from upstream. Your next submission should also be a pull request given the number of patches. rtg On 7/7/21 12:00 PM, Asmaa Mnebhi wrote: > BugLink: > https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fbugs > .launchpad.net%2Fbugs%2F1934923&data=04%7C01%7Casmaa%40nvidia.com% > 7Ca736493e9b044350476208d94176229f%7C43083d15727340c1b7db39efd9ccc17a% > 7C0%7C0%7C637612797916293175%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwM > DAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&sdata=FhQ > F78BXwmPDDYkl4GxrMuph8y6xgyZtK2UiK2DSFgY%3D&reserved=0 > > SRU Justification: > > [Impact] > > The mlxbf-gige driver has just been upstreamed so linux-bluefield needs to be synced up with what we have upstreamed. > > [Fix] > > * Cleaned up the gige driver as instructed by maintainers > * removed dependency between the mlxbf-gige driver and gpio-mlxbf2 > driver > * updated the UEFI ACPI table to reflect the above changes > > [Test Case] > > * oob_net0 coming up after several SW_RESET or reboot > * oob_net0 coming up after several powercycles > * oob_net0 coming up after pushing a new Ubuntu/CentOS/Yocto > * rmmod/modprove mlxbf_gige several times > * OOB PXE boot multiple times from UEFI menu > * automate OOB PXE boot and do reboot > * automate OOB PXE boot and do powercycle > * Test that GPIO7 reset still works on BlueSphere like boards > > [Regression Potential] > > Any of the test cases above could be impacted due to these new changes. > -- ----------- Tim Gardner Canonical, Inc
On 7/7/21 1:52 PM, Asmaa Mnebhi wrote: > Hi Tim, > > That would mean I would have to submit multiple patches: > 1) revert all 20 changes (which is time consuming) > 2) cherry-pick from upstreaming > 3) create a separate patch for the gpio driver > 4) create a patch to add some code we left out of the upstreamed version > > So I would prefer it if we could keep this one patch but if you still think it is better, I will do it. > Indeed, I do think it is better. Otherwise a lot of potentially valuable change information gets buried. rtg ----------- Tim Gardner Canonical, Inc
I did "git revert" all 20 commits. So I am wondering how to proceed now: 1) I assume I need to send one pull request for all 20 reverts? 2) Then send another request for the cherry-pick? 3) where should we send the pull request to? We have been sending you all patches based on the focal repo/master-next branch (git clone git+ssh://<username>@git.launchpad.net/~canonical-kernel/ubuntu/+source/linux-bluefield/+git/focal). The focal repo doesn’t have a remote canonical branch: git remote -v origin git+ssh://asmaam@git.launchpad.net/~canonical-kernel/ubuntu/+source/linux-bluefield/+git/focal (fetch) origin git+ssh://asmaam@git.launchpad.net/~canonical-kernel/ubuntu/+source/linux-bluefield/+git/focal (push) 4) I will additionally create 2 patches and send them via the focal repo (git send-email .): - one for updating the gpio driver - one for adding some code in mlxbf-gige we left out in the upstreamed version Thanks, Asmaa -----Original Message----- From: Tim Gardner <tim.gardner@canonical.com> Sent: Thursday, July 8, 2021 10:27 AM To: Asmaa Mnebhi <asmaa@nvidia.com>; kernel-team@lists.ubuntu.com Cc: Meriton Tuli <meriton@nvidia.com>; Khoa Vo <khoav@nvidia.com>; David Thompson <davthompson@nvidia.com> Subject: Re: NAK: [SRU][F:linux-bluefield][PATCH v1 0/1] UBUNTU: SAUCE: Sync up mlxbf-gige with upstreamed version On 7/7/21 1:52 PM, Asmaa Mnebhi wrote: > Hi Tim, > > That would mean I would have to submit multiple patches: > 1) revert all 20 changes (which is time consuming) > 2) cherry-pick from upstreaming > 3) create a separate patch for the gpio driver > 4) create a patch to add some code we left out of the upstreamed > version > > So I would prefer it if we could keep this one patch but if you still think it is better, I will do it. > Indeed, I do think it is better. Otherwise a lot of potentially valuable change information gets buried. rtg ----------- Tim Gardner Canonical, Inc
On 7/9/21 9:44 AM, Asmaa Mnebhi wrote: > I did "git revert" all 20 commits. So I am wondering how to proceed now: > > 1) I assume I need to send one pull request for all 20 reverts? > 2) Then send another request for the cherry-pick? > 3) where should we send the pull request to? We have been sending you all patches based on the focal repo/master-next branch (git clone git+ssh://<username>@git.launchpad.net/~canonical-kernel/ubuntu/+source/linux-bluefield/+git/focal). The focal repo doesn’t have a remote canonical branch: > git remote -v > origin git+ssh://asmaam@git.launchpad.net/~canonical-kernel/ubuntu/+source/linux-bluefield/+git/focal (fetch) > origin git+ssh://asmaam@git.launchpad.net/~canonical-kernel/ubuntu/+source/linux-bluefield/+git/focal (push) > > 4) I will additionally create 2 patches and send them via the focal repo (git send-email .): > - one for updating the gpio driver > - one for adding some code in mlxbf-gige we left out in the upstreamed version > > Thanks, > Asmaa > You can send all of the patches, including the cherry-pick, gpio driver, and mlxbf-gige changes in one pull request. They are, after all, related to updating to the upstream version. Send your pull request to this mailing list as you would normally. rtg