Re: [PATCH 6.16 000/627] 6.16.1-rc1 review

[Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>]

On Wed, Aug 13, 2025 at 05:46:26PM +0530, Naresh Kamboju wrote:
> Long story:
> 1)
> The perf gcc-13 build failed on x86_64 and i386.
> 
> Build regression: qemu-arm64 ARM64_64K_PAGES ltp syscalls swap fsync
> fallocate failed.
> 
> > Ian Rogers <irogers@google.com>
> >     perf topdown: Use attribute to see an event is a topdown metic or slots
> 
> Build error:
> 
> arch/x86/tests/topdown.c: In function 'event_cb':
> arch/x86/tests/topdown.c:53:25: error: implicit declaration of
> function 'pr_debug' [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
>    53 |                         pr_debug("Broken topdown information
> for '%s'\n", evsel__name(evsel));
>       |                         ^~~~~~~~
> cc1: all warnings being treated as errors

Already fixed.

> 2)
> 
> The following list of LTP syscalls failure noticed on qemu-arm64 with
> stable-rc 6.16.1-rc1 with CONFIG_ARM64_64K_PAGES=y build configuration.
> 
> Most failures report ENOSPC (28) or mkswap errors, which may be related
> to disk space handling in the 64K page configuration on qemu-arm64.
> 
> The issue is reproducible on multiple runs.
> 
> * qemu-arm64, ltp-syscalls - 64K page size test failures list,
> 
>   - fallocate04
>   - fallocate05
>   - fdatasync03
>   - fsync01
>   - fsync04
>   - ioctl_fiemap01
>   - swapoff01
>   - swapoff02
>   - swapon01
>   - swapon02
>   - swapon03
>   - sync01
>   - sync_file_range02
>   - syncfs01
> 
> Reproducibility:
>  - 64K config above listed test fails
>  - 4K config above listed test pass.
> 
> Regression Analysis:
> - New regression? yes

Regression from 6.16?  Or just from 6.15.y?

> 3)
> 
> Test regression: stable-rc 6.16.1-rc1 WARNING fs jbd2 transaction.c
> start_this_handle
> 
> Kernel warning noticed on this stable-rc 6.16.1-rc1 this regression was
> reported last month on the Linux next,
> 
> - https://lore.kernel.org/all/CA+G9fYsyYQ3ZL4xaSg1-Tt5Evto7Zd+hgNWZEa9cQLbahA1+xg@mail.gmail.com/

Ok, no real regression here if this was already in 6.16.

Doesn't look like it got fixed in 6.17-rc1 either :(

thanks,

greg k-h