From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-1.web.codeaurora.org [10.30.226.201]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 963F81494D9; Tue, 26 Aug 2025 14:45:18 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1756219518; cv=none; b=sdcUYvMsacUntCsg/HPisJPYsLC4BP6agyr9cQI1Te4bBTb5rn9N47vVPeL++VAVJSG2tTfo9tgspi+ZDKe+CZdo/QSIOPD6nB82D9YT4aoC1Btyd59AuyxiaqzPclIZY90C9ylWPDs5hKRxz8oO2LRB6CkPkPKFztUcV8rbG9I= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1756219518; c=relaxed/simple; bh=g45d8EkSLfoneJnQw99PP1Rvrm1Zwnfx3ZjSKUMKZEM=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=XEL9GYDlJTC3w4oKkBOwgTg2vZac6jJnhC/0RhipL+A/R6GYdpkDvHXiJx8gmCrg7uP0IAbbeGXed+Q8Zd+9cG/L3egYj8Fufk9hYo14Q7hebANpEiF+MZB3EBKRr3xbKghzelmuKV4y/oURd/nJcLSLkaiOD/78WgxK2f0ayU8= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=linuxfoundation.org header.i=@linuxfoundation.org header.b=ZPihBAUn; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=linuxfoundation.org header.i=@linuxfoundation.org header.b="ZPihBAUn" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id F3198C4CEF1; Tue, 26 Aug 2025 14:45:17 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=linuxfoundation.org; s=korg; t=1756219518; bh=g45d8EkSLfoneJnQw99PP1Rvrm1Zwnfx3ZjSKUMKZEM=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=ZPihBAUn5iuIH7v+H5Aqv3qif4s16POJwJAyJWE619kiHLzVFiAbiXSqeY6fqcHMD M2mG92KFqkIhoMrp22WOe+QqucjZU4aecHppCKg/T9rBqKgHy4krDkaE2zJXzign4N EPQCJ2EZm+9fPL9SaoKphmD8L7I5saMMFlcJg82Q= Date: Tue, 26 Aug 2025 14:50:48 +0200 From: Greg Kroah-Hartman To: Brett A C Sheffield Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org, patches@lists.linux.dev, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, torvalds@linux-foundation.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org, linux@roeck-us.net, shuah@kernel.org, patches@kernelci.org, lkft-triage@lists.linaro.org, pavel@denx.de, jonathanh@nvidia.com, f.fainelli@gmail.com, sudipm.mukherjee@gmail.com, srw@sladewatkins.net, rwarsow@gmx.de, conor@kernel.org, hargar@microsoft.com, broonie@kernel.org, achill@achill.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 6.6 000/587] 6.6.103-rc1 review Message-ID: <2025082620-humorous-stinky-bf0e@gregkh> References: <20250826110952.942403671@linuxfoundation.org> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: patches@lists.linux.dev List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: On Tue, Aug 26, 2025 at 12:42:40PM +0000, Brett A C Sheffield wrote: > Hi Greg, > > On 2025-08-26 13:02, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > > This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 6.6.103 release. > > There are 587 patches in this series, all will be posted as a response > > to this one. If anyone has any issues with these being applied, please > > let me know. > > > > Responses should be made by Thu, 28 Aug 2025 11:08:24 +0000. > > Anything received after that time might be too late. > > Quick query - should we be backporting a known regression, even if it is in > mainline presently, or do we wait until the fix is applied to mainline and > *then* backport both patches? > > 9e30ecf23b1b ("net: ipv4: fix incorrect MTU in broadcast routes") > > introduces a regression which breaks IPv4 broadcast, which stops WOL working > (breaking my CI system), among other things: > > https://lore.kernel.org/regressions/20250822165231.4353-4-bacs@librecast.net > > This regression has *already* been backported to: > > - 6.16.3 > - 6.12.43 > > so I guess we wait for a fix for these. > > However, it is not yet present in the other stable kernels. The new stable > release candidates today would spread the breakage to: > > - 6.6.y > - 6.1.y > - 5.15.y > - 5.10.y > > Do we revert this patch in today's RCs for now, or keep it for full > compatibility with mainline bugliness? Is the fix in linux-next yet? If it's there, I can queue it up everywhere, which might be best. thanks, greg k-h