From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail-io1-f43.google.com (mail-io1-f43.google.com [209.85.166.43]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 346F5C13D for ; Mon, 14 Aug 2023 18:33:45 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-io1-f43.google.com with SMTP id ca18e2360f4ac-77ac14ff51bso180862639f.3 for ; Mon, 14 Aug 2023 11:33:45 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20221208; t=1692038024; x=1692642824; h=in-reply-to:content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id :subject:cc:to:from:date:sender:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id :reply-to; bh=hA1c32nPoqRtqKf1PeXAkYTakp7BkAfWNw6eIzfC7MU=; b=SoApQCrCfC7Mt89LgZDoWi1W1VWVv/sBUPllr/NAiHmv7RJREjec9tUvnmqf2ONb8f FTuhY+ZCQCL8UYzmbahUniwGqy9YqArSKiJl8bhPxu20rR5ny+2QKQ5SoRW3QM0ZWblX Jgxkc7ANJnqnsJBhyhBZJxtdDsXjTKcAgST/bKI1YIV4/o5gwyC6qEL6Y5eTcVvr27ma bgu1Yv2E8bVcwsGCvhWYVmx32odVL8jGMF+lYn0OyyJnr4K62jV4/JXnO+0AKuJFWmoQ y4JPrFchLR/ie2g+dJKkBXb1lZBuQhW1Wb8oR4zBD9tIjVumkKegnj620ntCo7XeKWwN rCaA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20221208; t=1692038024; x=1692642824; h=in-reply-to:content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id :subject:cc:to:from:date:sender:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc :subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=hA1c32nPoqRtqKf1PeXAkYTakp7BkAfWNw6eIzfC7MU=; b=DuAoz5aBdJcy9S9hhrOheqalMFeq2u/Rf5WmwZNK/DI99S+CCenQdmOWtDa/k0VRVG +fWXPhbgTyKld6H61RVxi5fp07Utt2AlWecJjehCR8x6AeuK148rX8zmYtqohw7VBcwK z+WhLTSt5GivRhC/ekco5yjSWMRv6N2U1Kmk8K9VTlr22J2Y1gilnBX86MAjjZl22pqg ksNz4/y4MD4e2lX7WFvFVkqwJGIofwErhl7aaL9vyvqqrAz+9wgSn9YS3ipgB2Wq132v MD746NaHJ7x8a1iDx4XEArf/yE+kJK2pyoNZRC4RsuspvykAOajBadc9uRHsyel+QGQ9 mszw== X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0Yyp3gHAuUaR7r+jVR87up7h/s5QGkZgl/5SV1qWmrR006qXEjnD KUEaskYgthmBL8H9CNbFsIA= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IGInvIBfbQ8LylVFc5S+ya7eq8omF2ey3IsarSvH5b8Avvbz5J1tuP4Xh+uIsPEnn4nNDa1mg== X-Received: by 2002:a6b:4a17:0:b0:790:aedd:3e81 with SMTP id w23-20020a6b4a17000000b00790aedd3e81mr12348202iob.8.1692038024176; Mon, 14 Aug 2023 11:33:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: from server.roeck-us.net ([2600:1700:e321:62f0:329c:23ff:fee3:9d7c]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id u2-20020a02c042000000b004310d570d6dsm3193100jam.94.2023.08.14.11.33.43 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Mon, 14 Aug 2023 11:33:43 -0700 (PDT) Sender: Guenter Roeck Date: Mon, 14 Aug 2023 11:33:42 -0700 From: Guenter Roeck To: Greg Kroah-Hartman Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org, patches@lists.linux.dev, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, torvalds@linux-foundation.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org, 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 Subject: Re: [PATCH 6.1 000/149] 6.1.46-rc1 review Message-ID: References: <20230813211718.757428827@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: <20230813211718.757428827@linuxfoundation.org> On Sun, Aug 13, 2023 at 11:17:25PM +0200, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 6.1.46 release. > There are 149 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 Tue, 15 Aug 2023 21:16:53 +0000. > Anything received after that time might be too late. > Build results: total: 157 pass: 157 fail: 0 Qemu test results: total: 521 pass: 519 fail: 2 Failed tests: arm:fuji-bmc:aspeed_g5_defconfig:notests:mem1G:mtd128,0,8,1:net,nic:aspeed-bmc-facebook-fuji:rootfs arm:bletchley-bmc,fmc-model=mt25qu02g,spi-model=mt25qu02g:aspeed_g5_defconfig:notests:mem1G:mtd256:net,nic:aspeed-bmc-facebook-bletchley:rootfs As already reported, the failing tests are crashing in f2fs code. This bears the questions 1) should I stop testing f2fs and 2), would it make sense to mark f2fs as broken in v6.1.y ? It doesn't seem to make sense to keep testing code which is known to be broken. Thanks, Guenter