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

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

[Naresh Kamboju]

On Tue, 12 Aug 2025 at 23:57, Greg Kroah-Hartman
<gregkh@linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
>
> This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 6.16.1 release.
> There are 627 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, 14 Aug 2025 17:32:40 +0000.
> Anything received after that time might be too late.
>
> The whole patch series can be found in one patch at:
>         https://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/v6.x/stable-review/patch-6.16.1-rc1.gz
> or in the git tree and branch at:
>         git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/stable/linux-stable-rc.git linux-6.16.y
> and the diffstat can be found below.
>
> thanks,
>
> greg k-h

LKFT found three regressions on stable-rc 6.16.1-rc1.

Short version:
1) Pef build regressions on x86_64 and i386
2) LTP syscalls failures with 64k Page size on qemu-arm64
3) Kernel warning at fs/jbd2/transaction.c start_this_handle x86, qemu-arm64

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

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
- Reproducibility? yes

Test regression: qemu-arm64 ARM64_64K_PAGES ltp syscalls swap fsync
fallocate failed.

Reported-by: Linux Kernel Functional Testing <lkft@linaro.org>

swapoff01:
libswap.c:198: TINFO: create a swapfile size of 1 megabytes (MB)
tst_ioctl.c:26: TINFO: FIBMAP ioctl is supported
libswap.c:218: TFAIL: mkswap on ext2/ext3/ext4 failed
swapoff01.c:44: TINFO: create a swapfile with 65536 block numbers
swapoff01.c:44: TCONF: Insufficient disk space to create swap file

swapoff02:
libswap.c:198: TINFO: create a swapfile size of 1 megabytes (MB)
tst_ioctl.c:26: TINFO: FIBMAP ioctl is supported
libswap.c:218: TFAIL: mkswap on ext2/ext3/ext4 failed
swapoff02.c:88: TINFO: create a swapfile size of 1 megabytes (MB)

swapon01:
libswap.c:198: TINFO: create a swapfile size of 1 megabytes (MB)
tst_ioctl.c:26: TINFO: FIBMAP ioctl is supported
libswap.c:218: TFAIL: mkswap on ext2/ext3/ext4 failed
swapon01.c:39: TINFO: create a swapfile size of 128 megabytes (MB)
tst_cmd.c:111: TBROK: 'mkswap' exited with a non-zero code 1 at tst_cmd.c:111

swapon02:
tst_ioctl.c:26: TINFO: FIBMAP ioctl is supported
libswap.c:218: TFAIL: mkswap on ext2/ext3/ext4 failed
swapon02.c:52: TINFO: create a swapfile size of 1 megabytes (MB)
tst_cmd.c:111: TBROK: 'mkswap' exited with a non-zero code 1 at tst_cmd.c:111

swapon03:
tst_ioctl.c:26: TINFO: FIBMAP ioctl is supported
libswap.c:218: TFAIL: mkswap on ext2/ext3/ext4 failed
tst_kconfig.c:88: TINFO: Parsing kernel config '/proc/config.gz'
tst_kconfig.c:88: TINFO: Parsing kernel config '/proc/config.gz'
tst_kconfig.c:88: TINFO: Parsing kernel config '/proc/config.gz'
tst_kconfig.c:88: TINFO: Parsing kernel config '/proc/config.gz'
swapon03.c:51: TINFO: create a swapfile size of 1 megabytes (MB)
tst_cmd.c:111: TBROK: 'mkswap' exited with a non-zero code 1 at tst_cmd.c:111

sync01:
sync01.c:49: TFAIL: Synced 11403264, expected 33554432

syncfs01:
syncfs01.c:53: TFAIL: Synced 4096, expected 33554432

sync_file_range02:
sync_file_range02.c:60: TFAIL: sync_file_range() failed: ENOSPC (28)

fdatasync03:
fdatasync03.c:43: TFAIL: fdatasync(fd) failed: ENOSPC (28)

fsync01:
tst_test.c:1888: TINFO: === Testing on ext4 ===
tst_test.c:1217: TINFO: Formatting /dev/loop0 with ext4 opts='' extra opts=''
mke2fs 1.47.2 (1-Jan-2025)
tst_test.c:1229: TINFO: Mounting /dev/loop0 to
/tmp/LTP_fsyX4HNML/mntpoint fstyp=ext4 flags=0
fsync01.c:28: TFAIL: fsync failed: ENOSPC (28)
fsync01.c:28: TFAIL: fsync failed: ENOSPC (28)
fsync01.c:28: TFAIL: fsync failed: ENOSPC (28)
fsync01.c:28: TFAIL: fsync failed: ENOSPC (28)
fsync01.c:28: TFAIL: fsync failed: ENOSPC (28)
fsync01.c:28: TFAIL: fsync failed: ENOSPC (28)
fsync01.c:28: TFAIL: fsync failed: ENOSPC (28)
fsync01.c:28: TFAIL: fsync failed: ENOSPC (28)
fsync01.c:28: TFAIL: fsync failed: ENOSPC (28)
fsync01.c:28: TFAIL: fsync failed: ENOSPC (28)

fsync04:
tst_test.c:1229: TINFO: Mounting /dev/loop0 to
/tmp/LTP_fsydyQA53/mnt_point fstyp=ext4 flags=0
fsync04.c:43: TFAIL: fsync(fd) failed: ENOSPC (28)

fallocate04:
fallocate04.c:198: TFAIL: fallocate failed: ENOSPC (28)

fallocate05:
tst_fill_fs.c:53: TBROK: fsync(4) failed: ENOSPC (28)

ioctl_fiemap01
tst_test.c:1217: TINFO: Formatting /dev/loop0 with ext4 opts='' extra opts=''
mke2fs 1.47.2 (1-Jan-2025)
tst_test.c:1229: TINFO: Mounting /dev/loop0 to
/tmp/LTP_iocjRR3ot/mntpoint fstyp=ext4 flags=0
ioctl_fiemap01.c:74: TPASS: ioctl(fd, FS_IOC_FIEMAP, fiemap) : EBADR (53)
ioctl_fiemap01.c:77: TPASS: ioctl(fd, FS_IOC_FIEMAP, fiemap) passed
ioctl_fiemap01.c:79: TPASS: Expect: Empty file should have 0 extends mapped
ioctl_fiemap01.c:86: TFAIL: ioctl(fd, FS_IOC_FIEMAP, fiemap) failed: ENOSPC (28)
ioctl_fiemap01.c:41: TFAIL: Expect: extent fm_mapped_extents is 1
ioctl_fiemap01.c:50: TFAIL: (extent->fe_flags & fe_mask) (0) != fe_flags (1)
ioctl_fiemap01.c:51: TPASS: Expect: fe_physical > 1
ioctl_fiemap01.c:52: TFAIL: extent->fe_length (4702687395951105107) !=
fe_length (1024)
ioctl_fiemap01.c:96: TFAIL: ioctl(fd, FS_IOC_FIEMAP, fiemap) failed: ENOSPC (28)
ioctl_fiemap01.c:41: TFAIL: Expect: extent fm_mapped_extents is 3
ioctl_fiemap01.c:50: TPASS: (extent->fe_flags & fe_mask) == fe_flags (0)
ioctl_fiemap01.c:51: TPASS: Expect: fe_physical > 1
ioctl_fiemap01.c:52: TFAIL: extent->fe_length (4702687395951105107) !=
fe_length (1024)
ioctl_fiemap01.c:50: TPASS: (extent->fe_flags & fe_mask) == fe_flags (0)
ioctl_fiemap01.c:51: TPASS: Expect: fe_physical > 1
ioctl_fiemap01.c:52: TFAIL: extent->fe_length (5136714152143953955) !=
fe_length (1024)
ioctl_fiemap01.c:50: TFAIL: (extent->fe_flags & fe_mask) (0) != fe_flags (1)
ioctl_fiemap01.c:51: TPASS: Expect: fe_physical > 1
ioctl_fiemap01.c:52: TFAIL: extent->fe_length (8387236464277024288) !=
fe_length (1024)


Links,
 - https://qa-reports.linaro.org/lkft/linux-stable-rc-linux-6.16.y/build/v6.16-628-gcd8771110407/testrun/29470711/suite/ltp-syscalls/tests/
 - https://qa-reports.linaro.org/lkft/linux-stable-rc-linux-6.16.y/build/v6.16-628-gcd8771110407/testrun/29470720/suite/ltp-syscalls/tests/
 - https://qa-reports.linaro.org/lkft/linux-stable-rc-linux-6.16.y/build/v6.16-628-gcd8771110407/testrun/29470711/suite/ltp-syscalls/test/sync01/log
 - https://qa-reports.linaro.org/lkft/linux-stable-rc-linux-6.16.y/build/v6.16-628-gcd8771110407/testrun/29470720/suite/ltp-syscalls/test/fdatasync03/log
 - https://qa-reports.linaro.org/lkft/linux-stable-rc-linux-6.16.y/build/v6.16-628-gcd8771110407/testrun/29470711/suite/ltp-syscalls/test/swapon01/details/
 - https://qa-reports.linaro.org/lkft/linux-stable-rc-linux-6.16.y/build/v6.16-628-gcd8771110407/testrun/29471488/suite/ltp-syscalls/tests/


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/

Kernel warnings:

------------[ cut here ]------------
[   34.805150] WARNING: CPU: 1 PID: 627 at fs/jbd2/transaction.c:334
start_this_handle (fs/jbd2/transaction.c:334 (discriminator 1))
[   34.807683] Modules linked in: btrfs blake2b_generic xor xor_neon
raid6_pq zstd_compress sm3_ce sha3_ce sha512_ce fuse drm backlight
ip_tables x_tables
[   34.809152] CPU: 1 UID: 0 PID: 627 Comm: io_control01 Not tainted
6.16.1-rc1 #1 PREEMPT
[   34.809652] Hardware name: linux,dummy-virt (DT)
[   34.809961] pstate: 63402009 (nZCv daif +PAN -UAO +TCO +DIT -SSBS BTYPE=--)
[   34.810205] pc : start_this_handle (fs/jbd2/transaction.c:334
(discriminator 1))
[   34.810395] lr : start_this_handle (fs/jbd2/transaction.c:334
(discriminator 1))
[   34.810798] sp : ffff800080e2f7e0
[   34.810962] x29: ffff800080e2f820 x28: fff00000c4b43000 x27: ffffa9c145dca000
[   34.811259] x26: 0000000000000658 x25: 0000000000000629 x24: 0000000000000002
[   34.811507] x23: 0000000000000629 x22: 0000000000000c40 x21: 0000000000000008
[   34.811750] x20: fff00000d0800348 x19: fff00000d0800348 x18: 0000000000000000
[   34.811992] x17: 0000000000000000 x16: 0000000000000000 x15: 0000000000000000
[   34.812234] x14: 0000000000000000 x13: 00000000ffffffff x12: 0000000000000000
[   34.812858] x11: 0000000000000000 x10: ffffa9c1456a8c08 x9 : ffffa9c142b54b84
[   34.813572] x8 : ffff800080e2f408 x7 : 0000000000000000 x6 : 0000000000000001
[   34.814462] x5 : ffffa9c145629000 x4 : ffffa9c1456293d0 x3 : 0000000000000000
[   34.815093] x2 : 0000000000000000 x1 : fff00000c4fd0000 x0 : 0000000000000050
[   34.815812] Call trace:
[   34.816213] start_this_handle (fs/jbd2/transaction.c:334
(discriminator 1)) (P)
[   34.816719] jbd2__journal_start (fs/jbd2/transaction.c:501)
[   34.817124] __ext4_journal_start_sb (fs/ext4/ext4_jbd2.c:117)
[   34.817687] ext4_do_writepages (fs/ext4/ext4_jbd2.h:242 fs/ext4/inode.c:2847)
[   34.818109] ext4_writepages (fs/ext4/inode.c:2954)
[   34.818549] do_writepages (mm/page-writeback.c:2636)
[   34.818983] filemap_fdatawrite_wbc (mm/filemap.c:386 mm/filemap.c:376)
[   34.819520] __filemap_fdatawrite_range (mm/filemap.c:420)
[   34.819942] file_write_and_wait_range (mm/filemap.c:794)
[   34.820349] ext4_sync_file (fs/ext4/fsync.c:154)
[   34.820486] vfs_fsync_range (fs/sync.c:188)
[   34.820624] do_fsync (fs/sync.c:201 fs/sync.c:212)
[   34.820743] __arm64_sys_fsync (fs/sync.c:215)
[   34.820882] invoke_syscall.constprop.0
(arch/arm64/include/asm/syscall.h:61 arch/arm64/kernel/syscall.c:54)
[   34.821046] do_el0_svc (include/linux/thread_info.h:135
(discriminator 2) arch/arm64/kernel/syscall.c:140 (discriminator 2)
arch/arm64/kernel/syscall.c:151 (discriminator 2))
[   34.821172] el0_svc (arch/arm64/include/asm/irqflags.h:82
(discriminator 1) arch/arm64/include/asm/irqflags.h:123 (discriminator
1) arch/arm64/include/asm/irqflags.h:136 (discriminator 1)
arch/arm64/kernel/entry-common.c:165 (discriminator 1)
arch/arm64/kernel/entry-common.c:178 (discriminator 1)
arch/arm64/kernel/entry-common.c:768 (discriminator 1))
[   34.821307] el0t_64_sync_handler (arch/arm64/kernel/entry-common.c:787)
[   34.821460] el0t_64_sync (arch/arm64/kernel/entry.S:600)
[   34.821712] ---[ end trace 0000000000000000 ]---

Link:
 -  https://regressions.linaro.org/lkft/linux-stable-rc-linux-6.16.y/v6.16-628-gcd8771110407/log-parser-test/exception-warning-cpu-pid-at-fsjbd2transaction-start_this_handle/

--
Linaro LKFT
https://lkft.linaro.org

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

[Greg Kroah-Hartman]

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

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

[Mark Brown]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1202 bytes --]

On Wed, Aug 13, 2025 at 05:46:26PM +0530, Naresh Kamboju wrote:
> On Tue, 12 Aug 2025 at 23:57, Greg Kroah-Hartman

> 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

I'm also seeing epoll_ctl04 failing on Raspberry Pi 4, there's a bisect
still running but I suspect given the error message:

epoll_ctl04.c:59: TFAIL: epoll_ctl(..., EPOLL_CTL_ADD, ...) with number of nesting is 5 expected EINVAL: ELOOP (40)

that it might be:

# bad: [b47ce23d38c737a2f84af2b18c5e6b6e09e4932d] eventpoll: Fix semi-unbounded recursion

which already got tested, or something adjacent.

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 488 bytes --]

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

[Naresh Kamboju]

On Wed, 13 Aug 2025 at 18:21, Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Aug 13, 2025 at 05:46:26PM +0530, Naresh Kamboju wrote:
> > On Tue, 12 Aug 2025 at 23:57, Greg Kroah-Hartman
>
> > 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

These test failures are not seen on Linus tree v6.16 or v6.15.

>
> I'm also seeing epoll_ctl04 failing on Raspberry Pi 4, there's a bisect
> still running but I suspect given the error message:

Right !
LTP syscalls epoll_ctl04 test is failing on Linux mainline as well
with this error on LKFT CI system on several platforms.

>
> epoll_ctl04.c:59: TFAIL: epoll_ctl(..., EPOLL_CTL_ADD, ...) with number of nesting is 5 expected EINVAL: ELOOP (40)
>
> that it might be:
>
> # bad: [b47ce23d38c737a2f84af2b18c5e6b6e09e4932d] eventpoll: Fix semi-unbounded recursion
>
> which already got tested, or something adjacent.

A patch has been proposed to update the LTP test case to align with
recent changes in the Linux kernel code.

[LTP] [PATCH] syscalls/epoll_ctl04: add ELOOP to expected errnos

-https://lore.kernel.org/ltp/39ee7abdee12e22074b40d46775d69d37725b932.1754386027.git.jstancek@redhat.com/

- Naresh

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

[Naresh Kamboju]

Hi Greg,

> > 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?

Based on available data, the issue is not present in v6.16 or v6.15.

Anders, bisected this regression and found,

  ext4: correct the reserved credits for extent conversion
    [ Upstream commit 95ad8ee45cdbc321c135a2db895d48b374ef0f87 ]

Report lore link,

https://lore.kernel.org/stable/CA+G9fYtBnCSa2zkaCn-oZKYz8jz5FZj0HS7DjSfMeamq3AXqNg@mail.gmail.com/

--
Linaro LKFT
https://lkft.linaro.org

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

[Greg Kroah-Hartman]

On Wed, Aug 13, 2025 at 08:01:51PM +0530, Naresh Kamboju wrote:
> Hi Greg,
> 
> > > 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?
> 
> Based on available data, the issue is not present in v6.16 or v6.15.
> 
> Anders, bisected this regression and found,
> 
>   ext4: correct the reserved credits for extent conversion
>     [ Upstream commit 95ad8ee45cdbc321c135a2db895d48b374ef0f87 ]
> 
> Report lore link,
> 
> https://lore.kernel.org/stable/CA+G9fYtBnCSa2zkaCn-oZKYz8jz5FZj0HS7DjSfMeamq3AXqNg@mail.gmail.com/

Great, and that's also affecting 6.17-rc1 so we are "bug compatible"?
:)

thanks

greg k-h

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

[Dan Carpenter]

On Wed, Aug 13, 2025 at 04:53:37PM +0200, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 13, 2025 at 08:01:51PM +0530, Naresh Kamboju wrote:
> > Hi Greg,
> > 
> > > > 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?
> > 
> > Based on available data, the issue is not present in v6.16 or v6.15.
> > 
> > Anders, bisected this regression and found,
> > 
> >   ext4: correct the reserved credits for extent conversion
> >     [ Upstream commit 95ad8ee45cdbc321c135a2db895d48b374ef0f87 ]
> > 
> > Report lore link,
> > 
> > https://lore.kernel.org/stable/CA+G9fYtBnCSa2zkaCn-oZKYz8jz5FZj0HS7DjSfMeamq3AXqNg@mail.gmail.com/
> 
> Great, and that's also affecting 6.17-rc1 so we are "bug compatible"?
> :)

Lol.

regards,
dan carpenter

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

[Zhang Yi]

On 2025/8/13 22:53, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 13, 2025 at 08:01:51PM +0530, Naresh Kamboju wrote:
>> Hi Greg,
>>
>>>> 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?
>>
>> Based on available data, the issue is not present in v6.16 or v6.15.
>>
>> Anders, bisected this regression and found,
>>
>>   ext4: correct the reserved credits for extent conversion
>>     [ Upstream commit 95ad8ee45cdbc321c135a2db895d48b374ef0f87 ]
>>
>> Report lore link,
>>
>> https://lore.kernel.org/stable/CA+G9fYtBnCSa2zkaCn-oZKYz8jz5FZj0HS7DjSfMeamq3AXqNg@mail.gmail.com/
> 
> Great, and that's also affecting 6.17-rc1 so we are "bug compatible"?
> :)
> 

Hi,

This issue has already fixed in 6.17-rc1 through this series:

https://lore.kernel.org/linux-ext4/20250707140814.542883-1-yi.zhang@huaweicloud.com/


To fix this issue in 6.16, it's necessary to backport the whole series
instead of just pick 5137d6c8906b ("ext4: fix insufficient credits
calculation in ext4_meta_trans_blocks()") and 95ad8ee45cdb {"ext4: correct
the reserved credits for extent conversion").  Otherwise, this will make
the problem more likely to occur.

Thanks,
Yi.

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

[Greg Kroah-Hartman]

On Thu, Aug 14, 2025 at 09:27:49AM +0800, Zhang Yi wrote:
> On 2025/8/13 22:53, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> > On Wed, Aug 13, 2025 at 08:01:51PM +0530, Naresh Kamboju wrote:
> >> Hi Greg,
> >>
> >>>> 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?
> >>
> >> Based on available data, the issue is not present in v6.16 or v6.15.
> >>
> >> Anders, bisected this regression and found,
> >>
> >>   ext4: correct the reserved credits for extent conversion
> >>     [ Upstream commit 95ad8ee45cdbc321c135a2db895d48b374ef0f87 ]
> >>
> >> Report lore link,
> >>
> >> https://lore.kernel.org/stable/CA+G9fYtBnCSa2zkaCn-oZKYz8jz5FZj0HS7DjSfMeamq3AXqNg@mail.gmail.com/
> > 
> > Great, and that's also affecting 6.17-rc1 so we are "bug compatible"?
> > :)
> > 
> 
> Hi,
> 
> This issue has already fixed in 6.17-rc1 through this series:
> 
> https://lore.kernel.org/linux-ext4/20250707140814.542883-1-yi.zhang@huaweicloud.com/
> 
> 
> To fix this issue in 6.16, it's necessary to backport the whole series
> instead of just pick 5137d6c8906b ("ext4: fix insufficient credits
> calculation in ext4_meta_trans_blocks()") and 95ad8ee45cdb {"ext4: correct
> the reserved credits for extent conversion").  Otherwise, this will make
> the problem more likely to occur.

Thanks, I'll just postpone this one for now.

greg k-h

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

[Greg Kroah-Hartman]

On Wed, Aug 13, 2025 at 07:11:05PM +0530, Naresh Kamboju wrote:
> On Wed, 13 Aug 2025 at 18:21, Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org> wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, Aug 13, 2025 at 05:46:26PM +0530, Naresh Kamboju wrote:
> > > On Tue, 12 Aug 2025 at 23:57, Greg Kroah-Hartman
> >
> > > 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
> 
> These test failures are not seen on Linus tree v6.16 or v6.15.
> 
> >
> > I'm also seeing epoll_ctl04 failing on Raspberry Pi 4, there's a bisect
> > still running but I suspect given the error message:
> 
> Right !
> LTP syscalls epoll_ctl04 test is failing on Linux mainline as well
> with this error on LKFT CI system on several platforms.
> 
> >
> > epoll_ctl04.c:59: TFAIL: epoll_ctl(..., EPOLL_CTL_ADD, ...) with number of nesting is 5 expected EINVAL: ELOOP (40)
> >
> > that it might be:
> >
> > # bad: [b47ce23d38c737a2f84af2b18c5e6b6e09e4932d] eventpoll: Fix semi-unbounded recursion
> >
> > which already got tested, or something adjacent.
> 
> A patch has been proposed to update the LTP test case to align with
> recent changes in the Linux kernel code.
> 
> [LTP] [PATCH] syscalls/epoll_ctl04: add ELOOP to expected errnos
> 
> -https://lore.kernel.org/ltp/39ee7abdee12e22074b40d46775d69d37725b932.1754386027.git.jstancek@redhat.com/

Great, thanks for letting us know that this is just a test-case issue.

greg k-h

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

[Namhyung Kim]

Hello,

Thanks for the report!

On Wed, Aug 13, 2025 at 02:50:49PM +0200, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> 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.

Are you sure?  I'm not seeing the fix.  Can you share the commit id?

I don't see the failure on my machine with gcc 14 but I also cannot
find what's the fix.

Thanks,
Namhyung

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

[Greg Kroah-Hartman]

On Thu, Aug 14, 2025 at 01:19:06PM -0700, Namhyung Kim wrote:
> Hello,
> 
> Thanks for the report!
> 
> On Wed, Aug 13, 2025 at 02:50:49PM +0200, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> > 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.
> 
> Are you sure?  I'm not seeing the fix.  Can you share the commit id?

I dropped the offending perf patch:
	https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/stable/stable-queue.git/commit/?id=4199b872a5585e025f62886724f4f9ae80e014ae

Did that not work for you?

thanks,

greg k-h

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

[Namhyung Kim]

On Fri, Aug 15, 2025 at 07:33:41AM +0200, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 14, 2025 at 01:19:06PM -0700, Namhyung Kim wrote:
> > Hello,
> > 
> > Thanks for the report!
> > 
> > On Wed, Aug 13, 2025 at 02:50:49PM +0200, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> > > 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.
> > 
> > Are you sure?  I'm not seeing the fix.  Can you share the commit id?
> 
> I dropped the offending perf patch:
> 	https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/stable/stable-queue.git/commit/?id=4199b872a5585e025f62886724f4f9ae80e014ae
> 
> Did that not work for you?

Oh sorry, I misunderstood you.  I thought you have a fix.

Thanks,
Namhyung