Patch: Fix lpae on exynos5

[Josh Boyer]

On Tue, Oct 29, 2013 at 8:48 AM, John Dulaney
<jdulaney at fedoraproject.org> wrote:
>> Date: Wed, 23 Oct 2013 15:53:18 +0100
>> Subject: Re: Patch: Fix lpae on exynos5
>> From: pbrobinson at gmail.com
>> To: jdulaney at fedoraproject.org
>> CC: kernel at lists.fedoraproject.org
>>
>> John,
>>
>> Is there any upstream references to this? Has this been tested against
>> the Fedora LPAE kernel config and are there any changes needed for
>> that, oh and which version of the Fedora kernel?
>>
>> Peter
>
> Peter,
> The source for this patch:
> https://github.com/virtualopensystems/linux-kvm-arm/commit/32682304c9935dd0aa55ee9196429d0955f26fa1
>
> I have tested it against the 3.11 and 3.12 kernels;  the file it patches is also specific to exynos5.

Thanks for the follow up.  A few comments/questions.

1) If you send a patch, it needs to be properly attributed if you did
not author it.  That includes carrying forward the From: for
authorship and the Signed-off-by lines.

2) The tree you pointed to appears to be some random github tree.
That is not upstream.  Upstream is the main torvalds tree, or allowing
for ARM, the ARM maintainers tree and the ARM SoC trees.  Now, it may
well be that this github tree is widely used and feeds into one of the
trees I mentioned, however it is really no different than pointing to
a random patch somewhere until those commits show up in one of those
trees.  (Github commits don't show commentary on the patch either.)

3) The specific patch you provide was authored 6 months ago, and
committed to github 3 months ago.  I went and looked in linux-next,
and it isn't there.  I looked in the various branches of the arm-soc
tree and it also isn't there.  Given the patch is half a year old now
and it still isn't even pending in the upstream tree, we'd wind up
carrying this as a patch basically forever.  I'm not keen on doing
that.

Could you push back on the authors to actually submit their patch to
the relevant upstream maintainers?

josh