[SRU][jammy:linux-xilinx-zynqmp][PATCH v2 0/1] Add breaks on flash-kernel older than 3.104ubuntu20

[Portia Stephens]

On Wed, Mar 20, 2024 at 7:43 PM Andrei Gherzan
<andrei.gherzan at canonical.com> wrote:
>
> On 24/03/19 04:31PM, Portia Stephens wrote:
> > [ Impact ]
> >
> > * flash-kernel uses the model string in the kernel's device tree to determine
> > what platform is running. Thus there is a dependency between the two packages
> > * A change in the model string for KR platforms was made to support rev B
> > (LP #2046280) which breaks older versions of flash-kernel.
> >
> > [ Test Plan ]
> >
> > * Kernel regression testing uses flash-kernel and will test this change
> > * certification testing uses flash-kernel and will test this change
> >
> > [ Where problems could occur ]
> >
> > * This will cause flash-kernel to be updated automatically when the kernel is
> > upgraded. This may introduce other issues caused by previous flash-kernel changes
> > if the user was not upgrading flash-kernel.
> >
> > [ Other info ]
> >
> > * flash-kernel Buglink: https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2054556
> > * Buglink: https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2058321
> >
> > Portia Stephens (1):
> >   UBUNTU: [Packaging] Add breaks on flash-kernel older than
> >     3.104ubuntu20
> >
> >  debian.zynqmp/control.d/flavour-control.stub | 2 +-
> >  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> You NACKed the first submission without a comment and ommitted a v2
> reason in the follow-up, too (as in a v2 change mentioned in the v2
> cover). It would help review a changelog of versions in covers and/or
> comments in NACKs.

There is no difference between v1 and v2. I use git publish and my
mail server crapped out between sending the first email and the second
of the original patch set. I wasn't sure if the second email from the
original patch set  would ever actually come through so i nack'd the
original to try and avoid confusion, although it clearly failed .

>
> --
> Andrei Gherzan