* Re: [PATCH 6.1 000/217] 6.1.95-rc1 review
2024-06-19 12:54 [PATCH 6.1 000/217] 6.1.95-rc1 review Greg Kroah-Hartman
@ 2024-06-19 14:22 ` Florian Fainelli
2024-06-19 17:06 ` SeongJae Park
` (11 subsequent siblings)
12 siblings, 0 replies; 20+ messages in thread
From: Florian Fainelli @ 2024-06-19 14:22 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Greg Kroah-Hartman, stable
Cc: patches, linux-kernel, torvalds, akpm, linux, shuah, patches,
lkft-triage, pavel, jonathanh, sudipm.mukherjee, srw, rwarsow,
conor, allen.lkml, broonie
On 6/19/2024 1:54 PM, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 6.1.95 release.
> There are 217 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 Fri, 21 Jun 2024 12:55:11 +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-6.1.95-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-6.1.y
> and the diffstat can be found below.
>
> thanks,
>
> greg k-h
On ARCH_BRCMSTB using 32-bit and 64-bit ARM kernels, build tested on
BMIPS_GENERIC:
Tested-by: Florian Fainelli <florian.fainelli@broadcom.com>
--
Florian
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 20+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH 6.1 000/217] 6.1.95-rc1 review
2024-06-19 12:54 [PATCH 6.1 000/217] 6.1.95-rc1 review Greg Kroah-Hartman
2024-06-19 14:22 ` Florian Fainelli
@ 2024-06-19 17:06 ` SeongJae Park
2024-06-19 19:52 ` Jon Hunter
` (10 subsequent siblings)
12 siblings, 0 replies; 20+ messages in thread
From: SeongJae Park @ 2024-06-19 17:06 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Greg Kroah-Hartman
Cc: SeongJae Park, stable, patches, linux-kernel, torvalds, akpm,
linux, shuah, patches, lkft-triage, pavel, jonathanh, f.fainelli,
sudipm.mukherjee, srw, rwarsow, conor, allen.lkml, broonie, damon
Hello,
On Wed, 19 Jun 2024 14:54:03 +0200 Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 6.1.95 release.
> There are 217 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 Fri, 21 Jun 2024 12:55:11 +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-6.1.95-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-6.1.y
> and the diffstat can be found below.
This rc kernel passes DAMON functionality test[1] on my test machine.
Attaching the test results summary below. Please note that I retrieved the
kernel from linux-stable-rc tree[2].
Tested-by: SeongJae Park <sj@kernel.org>
[1] https://github.com/awslabs/damon-tests/tree/next/corr
[2] 7035314997c8 ("Linux 6.1.95-rc1")
Thanks,
SJ
[...]
---
ok 1 selftests: damon: debugfs_attrs.sh
ok 2 selftests: damon: debugfs_schemes.sh
ok 3 selftests: damon: debugfs_target_ids.sh
ok 4 selftests: damon: debugfs_empty_targets.sh
ok 5 selftests: damon: debugfs_huge_count_read_write.sh
ok 6 selftests: damon: debugfs_duplicate_context_creation.sh
ok 7 selftests: damon: sysfs.sh
ok 1 selftests: damon-tests: kunit.sh
ok 2 selftests: damon-tests: huge_count_read_write.sh
ok 3 selftests: damon-tests: buffer_overflow.sh
ok 4 selftests: damon-tests: rm_contexts.sh
ok 5 selftests: damon-tests: record_null_deref.sh
ok 6 selftests: damon-tests: dbgfs_target_ids_read_before_terminate_race.sh
ok 7 selftests: damon-tests: dbgfs_target_ids_pid_leak.sh
ok 8 selftests: damon-tests: damo_tests.sh
ok 9 selftests: damon-tests: masim-record.sh
ok 10 selftests: damon-tests: build_i386.sh
ok 11 selftests: damon-tests: build_arm64.sh
ok 12 selftests: damon-tests: build_m68k.sh
ok 13 selftests: damon-tests: build_i386_idle_flag.sh
ok 14 selftests: damon-tests: build_i386_highpte.sh
ok 15 selftests: damon-tests: build_nomemcg.sh
[33m
[92mPASS [39m
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 20+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH 6.1 000/217] 6.1.95-rc1 review
2024-06-19 12:54 [PATCH 6.1 000/217] 6.1.95-rc1 review Greg Kroah-Hartman
2024-06-19 14:22 ` Florian Fainelli
2024-06-19 17:06 ` SeongJae Park
@ 2024-06-19 19:52 ` Jon Hunter
2024-06-19 20:53 ` Pavel Machek
` (9 subsequent siblings)
12 siblings, 0 replies; 20+ messages in thread
From: Jon Hunter @ 2024-06-19 19:52 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Greg Kroah-Hartman
Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman, patches, linux-kernel, torvalds, akpm, linux,
shuah, patches, lkft-triage, pavel, jonathanh, f.fainelli,
sudipm.mukherjee, srw, rwarsow, conor, allen.lkml, broonie,
linux-tegra, stable
On Wed, 19 Jun 2024 14:54:03 +0200, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 6.1.95 release.
> There are 217 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 Fri, 21 Jun 2024 12:55:11 +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-6.1.95-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-6.1.y
> and the diffstat can be found below.
>
> thanks,
>
> greg k-h
All tests passing for Tegra ...
Test results for stable-v6.1:
10 builds: 10 pass, 0 fail
26 boots: 26 pass, 0 fail
116 tests: 116 pass, 0 fail
Linux version: 6.1.95-rc1-g0891d95b9db3
Boards tested: tegra124-jetson-tk1, tegra186-p2771-0000,
tegra194-p2972-0000, tegra194-p3509-0000+p3668-0000,
tegra20-ventana, tegra210-p2371-2180,
tegra210-p3450-0000, tegra30-cardhu-a04
Tested-by: Jon Hunter <jonathanh@nvidia.com>
Jon
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 20+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH 6.1 000/217] 6.1.95-rc1 review
2024-06-19 12:54 [PATCH 6.1 000/217] 6.1.95-rc1 review Greg Kroah-Hartman
` (2 preceding siblings ...)
2024-06-19 19:52 ` Jon Hunter
@ 2024-06-19 20:53 ` Pavel Machek
2024-06-19 21:13 ` Allen
` (8 subsequent siblings)
12 siblings, 0 replies; 20+ messages in thread
From: Pavel Machek @ 2024-06-19 20:53 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Greg Kroah-Hartman
Cc: stable, patches, linux-kernel, torvalds, akpm, linux, shuah,
patches, lkft-triage, pavel, jonathanh, f.fainelli,
sudipm.mukherjee, srw, rwarsow, conor, allen.lkml, broonie
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 659 bytes --]
Hi!
> This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 6.1.95 release.
> There are 217 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.
CIP testing did not find any problems here:
https://gitlab.com/cip-project/cip-testing/linux-stable-rc-ci/-/tree/linux-6.1.y
Tested-by: Pavel Machek (CIP) <pavel@denx.de>
Best regards,
Pavel
--
DENX Software Engineering GmbH, Managing Director: Erika Unter
HRB 165235 Munich, Office: Kirchenstr.5, D-82194 Groebenzell, Germany
[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 195 bytes --]
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 20+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH 6.1 000/217] 6.1.95-rc1 review
2024-06-19 12:54 [PATCH 6.1 000/217] 6.1.95-rc1 review Greg Kroah-Hartman
` (3 preceding siblings ...)
2024-06-19 20:53 ` Pavel Machek
@ 2024-06-19 21:13 ` Allen
2024-06-20 3:43 ` Kelsey Steele
` (7 subsequent siblings)
12 siblings, 0 replies; 20+ messages in thread
From: Allen @ 2024-06-19 21:13 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Greg Kroah-Hartman
Cc: stable, patches, linux-kernel, torvalds, akpm, linux, shuah,
patches, lkft-triage, pavel, jonathanh, f.fainelli,
sudipm.mukherjee, srw, rwarsow, conor, broonie
> This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 6.1.95 release.
> There are 217 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 Fri, 21 Jun 2024 12:55:11 +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-6.1.95-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-6.1.y
> and the diffstat can be found below.
>
> thanks,
>
> greg k-h
>
Compiled and booted on my x86_64 and ARM64 test systems. No errors or
regressions.
Tested-by: Allen Pais <apais@linux.microsoft.com>
Thanks.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 20+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH 6.1 000/217] 6.1.95-rc1 review
2024-06-19 12:54 [PATCH 6.1 000/217] 6.1.95-rc1 review Greg Kroah-Hartman
` (4 preceding siblings ...)
2024-06-19 21:13 ` Allen
@ 2024-06-20 3:43 ` Kelsey Steele
2024-06-20 11:41 ` Mark Brown
` (6 subsequent siblings)
12 siblings, 0 replies; 20+ messages in thread
From: Kelsey Steele @ 2024-06-20 3:43 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Greg Kroah-Hartman
Cc: stable, patches, linux-kernel, torvalds, akpm, linux, shuah,
patches, lkft-triage, pavel, jonathanh, f.fainelli,
sudipm.mukherjee, srw, rwarsow, conor, allen.lkml, broonie
On Wed, Jun 19, 2024 at 02:54:03PM +0200, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 6.1.95 release.
> There are 217 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 Fri, 21 Jun 2024 12:55:11 +0000.
> Anything received after that time might be too late.
>
No regressions found on WSL (x86 and arm64).
Built, booted, and reviewed dmesg.
Thank you. :)
Tested-by: Kelsey Steele <kelseysteele@linux.microsoft.com>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 20+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH 6.1 000/217] 6.1.95-rc1 review
2024-06-19 12:54 [PATCH 6.1 000/217] 6.1.95-rc1 review Greg Kroah-Hartman
` (5 preceding siblings ...)
2024-06-20 3:43 ` Kelsey Steele
@ 2024-06-20 11:41 ` Mark Brown
2024-06-20 14:34 ` Ron Economos
` (5 subsequent siblings)
12 siblings, 0 replies; 20+ messages in thread
From: Mark Brown @ 2024-06-20 11:41 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Greg Kroah-Hartman
Cc: stable, patches, linux-kernel, torvalds, akpm, linux, shuah,
patches, lkft-triage, pavel, jonathanh, f.fainelli,
sudipm.mukherjee, srw, rwarsow, conor, allen.lkml
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 345 bytes --]
On Wed, Jun 19, 2024 at 02:54:03PM +0200, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 6.1.95 release.
> There are 217 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.
Tested-by: Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>
[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 488 bytes --]
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 20+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH 6.1 000/217] 6.1.95-rc1 review
2024-06-19 12:54 [PATCH 6.1 000/217] 6.1.95-rc1 review Greg Kroah-Hartman
` (6 preceding siblings ...)
2024-06-20 11:41 ` Mark Brown
@ 2024-06-20 14:34 ` Ron Economos
2024-06-20 16:23 ` Naresh Kamboju
` (4 subsequent siblings)
12 siblings, 0 replies; 20+ messages in thread
From: Ron Economos @ 2024-06-20 14:34 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Greg Kroah-Hartman, stable
Cc: patches, linux-kernel, torvalds, akpm, linux, shuah, patches,
lkft-triage, pavel, jonathanh, f.fainelli, sudipm.mukherjee, srw,
rwarsow, conor, allen.lkml, broonie
On 6/19/24 5:54 AM, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 6.1.95 release.
> There are 217 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 Fri, 21 Jun 2024 12:55:11 +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-6.1.95-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-6.1.y
> and the diffstat can be found below.
>
> thanks,
>
> greg k-h
Built and booted successfully on RISC-V RV64 (HiFive Unmatched).
Tested-by: Ron Economos <re@w6rz.net>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 20+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH 6.1 000/217] 6.1.95-rc1 review
2024-06-19 12:54 [PATCH 6.1 000/217] 6.1.95-rc1 review Greg Kroah-Hartman
` (7 preceding siblings ...)
2024-06-20 14:34 ` Ron Economos
@ 2024-06-20 16:23 ` Naresh Kamboju
2024-06-20 17:32 ` Sven Joachim
` (3 subsequent siblings)
12 siblings, 0 replies; 20+ messages in thread
From: Naresh Kamboju @ 2024-06-20 16:23 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Greg Kroah-Hartman
Cc: stable, patches, linux-kernel, torvalds, akpm, linux, shuah,
patches, lkft-triage, pavel, jonathanh, f.fainelli,
sudipm.mukherjee, srw, rwarsow, conor, allen.lkml, broonie
On Wed, 19 Jun 2024 at 18:56, Greg Kroah-Hartman
<gregkh@linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
>
> This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 6.1.95 release.
> There are 217 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 Fri, 21 Jun 2024 12:55:11 +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-6.1.95-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-6.1.y
> and the diffstat can be found below.
>
> thanks,
>
> greg k-h
Results from Linaro’s test farm.
No regressions on arm64, arm, x86_64, and i386.
Tested-by: Linux Kernel Functional Testing <lkft@linaro.org>
## Build
* kernel: 6.1.95-rc1
* git: https://gitlab.com/Linaro/lkft/mirrors/stable/linux-stable-rc
* git branch: linux-6.1.y
* git commit: 0891d95b9db39ae51c0edef73f56d41521be9fbd
* git describe: v6.1.94-218-g0891d95b9db3
* test details:
https://qa-reports.linaro.org/lkft/linux-stable-rc-linux-6.1.y/build/v6.1.94-218-g0891d95b9db3
## Test Regressions (compared to v6.1.94)
## Metric Regressions (compared to v6.1.94)
## Test Fixes (compared to v6.1.94)
## Metric Fixes (compared to v6.1.94)
## Test result summary
total: 171975, pass: 145682, fail: 3002, skip: 23038, xfail: 253
## Build Summary
* arc: 5 total, 5 passed, 0 failed
* arm: 135 total, 135 passed, 0 failed
* arm64: 38 total, 38 passed, 0 failed
* i386: 29 total, 29 passed, 0 failed
* mips: 24 total, 24 passed, 0 failed
* parisc: 3 total, 3 passed, 0 failed
* powerpc: 33 total, 33 passed, 0 failed
* riscv: 9 total, 9 passed, 0 failed
* s390: 12 total, 12 passed, 0 failed
* sh: 10 total, 10 passed, 0 failed
* sparc: 6 total, 6 passed, 0 failed
* x86_64: 33 total, 33 passed, 0 failed
## Test suites summary
* boot
* kselftest-android
* kselftest-arm64
* kselftest-breakpoints
* kselftest-capabilities
* kselftest-cgroup
* kselftest-clone3
* kselftest-core
* kselftest-cpu-hotplug
* kselftest-cpufreq
* kselftest-drivers-dma-buf
* kselftest-efivarfs
* kselftest-exec
* kselftest-filesystems
* kselftest-filesystems-binderfs
* kselftest-filesystems-epoll
* kselftest-firmware
* kselftest-fpu
* kselftest-ftrace
* kselftest-futex
* kselftest-gpio
* kselftest-intel_pstate
* kselftest-ipc
* kselftest-ir
* kselftest-kcmp
* kselftest-kexec
* kselftest-kvm
* kselftest-lib
* kselftest-livepatch
* kselftest-membarrier
* kselftest-memfd
* kselftest-memory-hotplug
* kselftest-mincore
* kselftest-mm
* kselftest-mount
* kselftest-mqueue
* kselftest-net
* kselftest-net-forwarding
* kselftest-net-mptcp
* kselftest-netfilter
* kselftest-nsfs
* kselftest-openat2
* kselftest-pid_namespace
* kselftest-pidfd
* kselftest-proc
* kselftest-pstore
* kselftest-ptrace
* kselftest-rseq
* kselftest-rtc
* kselftest-seccomp
* kselftest-sigaltstack
* kselftest-size
* kselftest-splice
* kselftest-static_keys
* kselftest-sync
* kselftest-sysctl
* kselftest-tc-testing
* kselftest-timens
* kselftest-timers
* kselftest-tmpfs
* kselftest-tpm2
* kselftest-user
* kselftest-user_events
* kselftest-vDSO
* kselftest-watchdog
* kselftest-x86
* kselftest-zram
* kunit
* kvm-unit-tests
* libgpiod
* log-parser-boot
* log-parser-test
* ltp-commands
* ltp-containers
* ltp-controllers
* ltp-cpuhotplug
* ltp-crypto
* ltp-cve
* ltp-dio
* ltp-fcntl-locktests
* ltp-fs
* ltp-fs_bind
* ltp-fs_perms_simple
* ltp-hugetlb
* ltp-ipc
* ltp-math
* ltp-mm
* ltp-nptl
* ltp-pty
* ltp-sched
* ltp-smoke
* ltp-smoketest
* ltp-syscalls
* ltp-tracing
* perf
* rcutorture
--
Linaro LKFT
https://lkft.linaro.org
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 20+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH 6.1 000/217] 6.1.95-rc1 review
2024-06-19 12:54 [PATCH 6.1 000/217] 6.1.95-rc1 review Greg Kroah-Hartman
` (8 preceding siblings ...)
2024-06-20 16:23 ` Naresh Kamboju
@ 2024-06-20 17:32 ` Sven Joachim
2024-06-20 20:08 ` Peter Schneider
` (2 subsequent siblings)
12 siblings, 0 replies; 20+ messages in thread
From: Sven Joachim @ 2024-06-20 17:32 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Greg Kroah-Hartman
Cc: stable, patches, linux-kernel, torvalds, akpm, linux, shuah,
patches, lkft-triage, pavel, jonathanh, f.fainelli,
sudipm.mukherjee, srw, rwarsow, conor, allen.lkml, broonie
On 2024-06-19 14:54 +0200, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 6.1.95 release.
> There are 217 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 Fri, 21 Jun 2024 12:55:11 +0000.
> Anything received after that time might be too late.
Works fine for me on x86_64.
Tested-by: Sven Joachim <svenjoac@gmx.de>
Cheers,
Sven
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 20+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH 6.1 000/217] 6.1.95-rc1 review
2024-06-19 12:54 [PATCH 6.1 000/217] 6.1.95-rc1 review Greg Kroah-Hartman
` (9 preceding siblings ...)
2024-06-20 17:32 ` Sven Joachim
@ 2024-06-20 20:08 ` Peter Schneider
2024-06-20 21:39 ` Shuah Khan
2024-06-22 14:58 ` [PATCH 6.1 000/217] 6.1.95-rc1 review [parisc64/C3700 boot failures] Guenter Roeck
12 siblings, 0 replies; 20+ messages in thread
From: Peter Schneider @ 2024-06-20 20:08 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Greg Kroah-Hartman, stable
Cc: patches, linux-kernel, torvalds, akpm, linux, shuah, patches,
lkft-triage, pavel, jonathanh, f.fainelli, sudipm.mukherjee, srw,
rwarsow, conor, allen.lkml, broonie
Am 19.06.2024 um 14:54 schrieb Greg Kroah-Hartman:
> This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 6.1.95 release.
> There are 217 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.
Built and booted successfully, I don't see any regressions nor any scary or suspicious
dmesg outout, running for an hour now. Built on dual socket Ivy Bridge Xeon E5-2697 v2.
Tested-by: Peter Schneider <pschneider1968@googlemail.com>
Still no goal in Spain vs Italy... 🙄
Beste Grüße,
Peter Schneider
--
Climb the mountain not to plant your flag, but to embrace the challenge,
enjoy the air and behold the view. Climb it so you can see the world,
not so the world can see you. -- David McCullough Jr.
OpenPGP: 0xA3828BD796CCE11A8CADE8866E3A92C92C3FF244
Download: https://www.peters-netzplatz.de/download/pschneider1968_pub.asc
https://keys.mailvelope.com/pks/lookup?op=get&search=pschneider1968@googlemail.com
https://keys.mailvelope.com/pks/lookup?op=get&search=pschneider1968@gmail.com
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 20+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH 6.1 000/217] 6.1.95-rc1 review
2024-06-19 12:54 [PATCH 6.1 000/217] 6.1.95-rc1 review Greg Kroah-Hartman
` (10 preceding siblings ...)
2024-06-20 20:08 ` Peter Schneider
@ 2024-06-20 21:39 ` Shuah Khan
2024-06-22 14:58 ` [PATCH 6.1 000/217] 6.1.95-rc1 review [parisc64/C3700 boot failures] Guenter Roeck
12 siblings, 0 replies; 20+ messages in thread
From: Shuah Khan @ 2024-06-20 21:39 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Greg Kroah-Hartman, stable
Cc: patches, linux-kernel, torvalds, akpm, linux, shuah, patches,
lkft-triage, pavel, jonathanh, f.fainelli, sudipm.mukherjee, srw,
rwarsow, conor, allen.lkml, broonie, Shuah Khan
On 6/19/24 06:54, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 6.1.95 release.
> There are 217 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 Fri, 21 Jun 2024 12:55:11 +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-6.1.95-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-6.1.y
> and the diffstat can be found below.
>
> thanks,
>
> greg k-h
>
Compiled and booted on my test system. No dmesg regressions.
Tested-by: Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org>
thanks,
-- Shuah
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 20+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH 6.1 000/217] 6.1.95-rc1 review [parisc64/C3700 boot failures]
2024-06-19 12:54 [PATCH 6.1 000/217] 6.1.95-rc1 review Greg Kroah-Hartman
` (11 preceding siblings ...)
2024-06-20 21:39 ` Shuah Khan
@ 2024-06-22 14:58 ` Guenter Roeck
2024-06-22 15:13 ` Helge Deller
12 siblings, 1 reply; 20+ messages in thread
From: Guenter Roeck @ 2024-06-22 14:58 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Greg Kroah-Hartman, stable
Cc: patches, linux-kernel, torvalds, akpm, shuah, patches,
lkft-triage, pavel, jonathanh, f.fainelli, sudipm.mukherjee, srw,
rwarsow, conor, allen.lkml, broonie, Oleg Nesterov, linux-parisc,
Helge Deller, James E.J. Bottomley
[ Copying parisc maintainers - maybe they can test on real hardware ]
On 6/19/24 05:54, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 6.1.95 release.
> There are 217 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 Fri, 21 Jun 2024 12:55:11 +0000.
> Anything received after that time might be too late.
>
...
> Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>
> zap_pid_ns_processes: clear TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL along with TIF_SIGPENDING
>
I can not explain it, but this patch causes all my parisc64 (C3700)
boot tests to crash. There are lots of memory corruption BUGs such as
[ 0.000000] =============================================================================
[ 0.000000] BUG kmalloc-96 (Not tainted): Padding overwritten. 0x0000000043411dd0-0x0000000043411f5f @offset=3536
ultimately followed by
[ 0.462562] Unaligned handler failed, ret = -14
...
[ 0.469160] IAOQ[0]: idr_alloc_cyclic+0x48/0x118
[ 0.469372] IAOQ[1]: idr_alloc_cyclic+0x54/0x118
[ 0.469548] RP(r2): __kernfs_new_node.constprop.0+0x160/0x420
[ 0.469782] Backtrace:
[ 0.469928] [<00000000404af108>] __kernfs_new_node.constprop.0+0x160/0x420
[ 0.470285] [<00000000404b0cac>] kernfs_new_node+0xbc/0x118
[ 0.470523] [<00000000404b158c>] kernfs_create_empty_dir+0x54/0xf0
[ 0.470756] [<00000000404b665c>] sysfs_create_mount_point+0x4c/0xb0
[ 0.470996] [<00000000401181cc>] cgroup_init+0x5b4/0x738
[ 0.471213] [<0000000040102220>] start_kernel+0x1238/0x1308
[ 0.471429] [<0000000040107c90>] start_parisc+0x188/0x1d0
...
[ 0.474956] Kernel panic - not syncing: Attempted to kill the idle task!
SeaBIOS wants SYSTEM RESET.
This is with qemu v9.0.1.
Reverting this patch fixes the problem (I tried several times to be sure
since I don't see the connection). I don't see the problem in any other
branch. Bisect log is attached for reference.
Guenter
---
# bad: [a6398e37309000e35cedb5cc328a0f8d00d7d7b9] Linux 6.1.95
# good: [eb44d83053d66372327e69145e8d2fa7400a4991] Linux 6.1.94
git bisect start 'HEAD' 'v6.1.94'
# good: [f17443d52d805c9a7fab5e67a4e8b973626fe1cd] cachefiles: resend an open request if the read request's object is closed
git bisect good f17443d52d805c9a7fab5e67a4e8b973626fe1cd
# good: [cc09e1d3519feab823685f4297853d468f44549d] iio: imu: inv_icm42600: delete unneeded update watermark call
git bisect good cc09e1d3519feab823685f4297853d468f44549d
# good: [b7b6bc60edb2132a569899bcd9ca099a0556c6ee] intel_th: pci: Add Granite Rapids SOC support
git bisect good b7b6bc60edb2132a569899bcd9ca099a0556c6ee
# good: [35e395373ecd14b64da7d54f565927a9368dcf20] mptcp: pm: update add_addr counters after connect
git bisect good 35e395373ecd14b64da7d54f565927a9368dcf20
# good: [29d35f0b53d4bd82ebc37c500a8dd73da61318ff] serial: 8250_dw: fall back to poll if there's no interrupt
git bisect good 29d35f0b53d4bd82ebc37c500a8dd73da61318ff
# good: [ea25a4c0de5700928c7fd0aa789eee39a457ba95] misc: microchip: pci1xxxx: Fix a memory leak in the error handling of gp_aux_bus_probe()
git bisect good ea25a4c0de5700928c7fd0aa789eee39a457ba95
# good: [e44999ec0b49dca9a9a2090c5432d893ea4f8d20] i2c: designware: Fix the functionality flags of the slave-only interface
git bisect good e44999ec0b49dca9a9a2090c5432d893ea4f8d20
# bad: [edd2754a62bee8d97b4808a15de024f66a1ddccf] zap_pid_ns_processes: clear TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL along with TIF_SIGPENDING
git bisect bad edd2754a62bee8d97b4808a15de024f66a1ddccf
# first bad commit: [edd2754a62bee8d97b4808a15de024f66a1ddccf] zap_pid_ns_processes: clear TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL along with TIF_SIGPENDING
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 20+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH 6.1 000/217] 6.1.95-rc1 review [parisc64/C3700 boot failures]
2024-06-22 14:58 ` [PATCH 6.1 000/217] 6.1.95-rc1 review [parisc64/C3700 boot failures] Guenter Roeck
@ 2024-06-22 15:13 ` Helge Deller
2024-06-22 15:34 ` Guenter Roeck
2024-06-23 14:28 ` Guenter Roeck
0 siblings, 2 replies; 20+ messages in thread
From: Helge Deller @ 2024-06-22 15:13 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Guenter Roeck, Greg Kroah-Hartman, stable
Cc: patches, linux-kernel, torvalds, akpm, shuah, patches,
lkft-triage, pavel, jonathanh, f.fainelli, sudipm.mukherjee, srw,
rwarsow, conor, allen.lkml, broonie, Oleg Nesterov, linux-parisc,
James E.J. Bottomley
On 6/22/24 16:58, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> [ Copying parisc maintainers - maybe they can test on real hardware ]
>
> On 6/19/24 05:54, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
>> This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 6.1.95 release.
>> There are 217 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 Fri, 21 Jun 2024 12:55:11 +0000.
>> Anything received after that time might be too late.
>>
> ...
>> Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>
>> zap_pid_ns_processes: clear TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL along with TIF_SIGPENDING
>>
>
> I can not explain it, but this patch causes all my parisc64 (C3700)
> boot tests to crash. There are lots of memory corruption BUGs such as
>
> [ 0.000000] =============================================================================
> [ 0.000000] BUG kmalloc-96 (Not tainted): Padding overwritten. 0x0000000043411dd0-0x0000000043411f5f @offset=3536
>
> ultimately followed by
>
> [ 0.462562] Unaligned handler failed, ret = -14
> ...
> [ 0.469160] IAOQ[0]: idr_alloc_cyclic+0x48/0x118
> [ 0.469372] IAOQ[1]: idr_alloc_cyclic+0x54/0x118
> [ 0.469548] RP(r2): __kernfs_new_node.constprop.0+0x160/0x420
> [ 0.469782] Backtrace:
> [ 0.469928] [<00000000404af108>] __kernfs_new_node.constprop.0+0x160/0x420
> [ 0.470285] [<00000000404b0cac>] kernfs_new_node+0xbc/0x118
> [ 0.470523] [<00000000404b158c>] kernfs_create_empty_dir+0x54/0xf0
> [ 0.470756] [<00000000404b665c>] sysfs_create_mount_point+0x4c/0xb0
> [ 0.470996] [<00000000401181cc>] cgroup_init+0x5b4/0x738
> [ 0.471213] [<0000000040102220>] start_kernel+0x1238/0x1308
> [ 0.471429] [<0000000040107c90>] start_parisc+0x188/0x1d0
> ...
> [ 0.474956] Kernel panic - not syncing: Attempted to kill the idle task!
> SeaBIOS wants SYSTEM RESET.
>
> This is with qemu v9.0.1.
Just to be sure, did you tested the same kernel on physical hardware as well?
Please note, that 64-bit hppa (C3700) support in qemu was just recently added
and is still considered experimental.
So, maybe it's not a bug in the source, but in qemu...?!?
> Reverting this patch fixes the problem (I tried several times to be sure
> since I don't see the connection). I don't see the problem in any other
> branch. Bisect log is attached for reference.
>
> Guenter
>
> ---
> # bad: [a6398e37309000e35cedb5cc328a0f8d00d7d7b9] Linux 6.1.95
> # good: [eb44d83053d66372327e69145e8d2fa7400a4991] Linux 6.1.94
> git bisect start 'HEAD' 'v6.1.94'
> # good: [f17443d52d805c9a7fab5e67a4e8b973626fe1cd] cachefiles: resend an open request if the read request's object is closed
> git bisect good f17443d52d805c9a7fab5e67a4e8b973626fe1cd
> # good: [cc09e1d3519feab823685f4297853d468f44549d] iio: imu: inv_icm42600: delete unneeded update watermark call
> git bisect good cc09e1d3519feab823685f4297853d468f44549d
> # good: [b7b6bc60edb2132a569899bcd9ca099a0556c6ee] intel_th: pci: Add Granite Rapids SOC support
> git bisect good b7b6bc60edb2132a569899bcd9ca099a0556c6ee
> # good: [35e395373ecd14b64da7d54f565927a9368dcf20] mptcp: pm: update add_addr counters after connect
> git bisect good 35e395373ecd14b64da7d54f565927a9368dcf20
> # good: [29d35f0b53d4bd82ebc37c500a8dd73da61318ff] serial: 8250_dw: fall back to poll if there's no interrupt
> git bisect good 29d35f0b53d4bd82ebc37c500a8dd73da61318ff
> # good: [ea25a4c0de5700928c7fd0aa789eee39a457ba95] misc: microchip: pci1xxxx: Fix a memory leak in the error handling of gp_aux_bus_probe()
> git bisect good ea25a4c0de5700928c7fd0aa789eee39a457ba95
> # good: [e44999ec0b49dca9a9a2090c5432d893ea4f8d20] i2c: designware: Fix the functionality flags of the slave-only interface
> git bisect good e44999ec0b49dca9a9a2090c5432d893ea4f8d20
> # bad: [edd2754a62bee8d97b4808a15de024f66a1ddccf] zap_pid_ns_processes: clear TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL along with TIF_SIGPENDING
> git bisect bad edd2754a62bee8d97b4808a15de024f66a1ddccf
> # first bad commit: [edd2754a62bee8d97b4808a15de024f66a1ddccf] zap_pid_ns_processes: clear TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL along with TIF_SIGPENDING
>
>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 20+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 6.1 000/217] 6.1.95-rc1 review [parisc64/C3700 boot failures]
2024-06-22 15:13 ` Helge Deller
@ 2024-06-22 15:34 ` Guenter Roeck
2024-06-22 15:49 ` Helge Deller
2024-06-23 14:28 ` Guenter Roeck
1 sibling, 1 reply; 20+ messages in thread
From: Guenter Roeck @ 2024-06-22 15:34 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Helge Deller, Greg Kroah-Hartman, stable
Cc: patches, linux-kernel, torvalds, akpm, shuah, patches,
lkft-triage, pavel, jonathanh, f.fainelli, sudipm.mukherjee, srw,
rwarsow, conor, allen.lkml, broonie, Oleg Nesterov, linux-parisc,
James E.J. Bottomley
On 6/22/24 08:13, Helge Deller wrote:
> On 6/22/24 16:58, Guenter Roeck wrote:
>> [ Copying parisc maintainers - maybe they can test on real hardware ]
>>
>> On 6/19/24 05:54, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
>>> This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 6.1.95 release.
>>> There are 217 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 Fri, 21 Jun 2024 12:55:11 +0000.
>>> Anything received after that time might be too late.
>>>
>> ...
>>> Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>
>>> zap_pid_ns_processes: clear TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL along with TIF_SIGPENDING
>>>
>>
>> I can not explain it, but this patch causes all my parisc64 (C3700)
>> boot tests to crash. There are lots of memory corruption BUGs such as
>>
>> [ 0.000000] =============================================================================
>> [ 0.000000] BUG kmalloc-96 (Not tainted): Padding overwritten. 0x0000000043411dd0-0x0000000043411f5f @offset=3536
>>
>> ultimately followed by
>>
>> [ 0.462562] Unaligned handler failed, ret = -14
>> ...
>> [ 0.469160] IAOQ[0]: idr_alloc_cyclic+0x48/0x118
>> [ 0.469372] IAOQ[1]: idr_alloc_cyclic+0x54/0x118
>> [ 0.469548] RP(r2): __kernfs_new_node.constprop.0+0x160/0x420
>> [ 0.469782] Backtrace:
>> [ 0.469928] [<00000000404af108>] __kernfs_new_node.constprop.0+0x160/0x420
>> [ 0.470285] [<00000000404b0cac>] kernfs_new_node+0xbc/0x118
>> [ 0.470523] [<00000000404b158c>] kernfs_create_empty_dir+0x54/0xf0
>> [ 0.470756] [<00000000404b665c>] sysfs_create_mount_point+0x4c/0xb0
>> [ 0.470996] [<00000000401181cc>] cgroup_init+0x5b4/0x738
>> [ 0.471213] [<0000000040102220>] start_kernel+0x1238/0x1308
>> [ 0.471429] [<0000000040107c90>] start_parisc+0x188/0x1d0
>> ...
>> [ 0.474956] Kernel panic - not syncing: Attempted to kill the idle task!
>> SeaBIOS wants SYSTEM RESET.
>>
>> This is with qemu v9.0.1.
>
> Just to be sure, did you tested the same kernel on physical hardware as well?
>
No, I don't have hardware. I only have qemu. That is why I copied you and
the parisc mailing list. I would hope that someone can either confirm that
this is a real problem or that it is qemu related. If it is qemu related,
I'll just stop testing c3700 64-bit support with qemu on v6.1.y and other
branches if/when the problem shows up there as well.
> Please note, that 64-bit hppa (C3700) support in qemu was just recently added
> and is still considered experimental.
> So, maybe it's not a bug in the source, but in qemu...?!?
>
Sure, that is possible, though it is a bit unusual that it is only seen
in 6.1.95 and not in any other branches or releases.
In summary, please see this report as "This is a problem seen in qemu.
It may or may not be seen on real hardware". Maybe I should add this as a
common disclaimer to all my reports to avoid misunderstandings.
Thanks,
Guenter
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 20+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 6.1 000/217] 6.1.95-rc1 review [parisc64/C3700 boot failures]
2024-06-22 15:34 ` Guenter Roeck
@ 2024-06-22 15:49 ` Helge Deller
2024-06-22 16:37 ` Guenter Roeck
2024-06-22 17:21 ` Guenter Roeck
0 siblings, 2 replies; 20+ messages in thread
From: Helge Deller @ 2024-06-22 15:49 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Guenter Roeck, Greg Kroah-Hartman, stable
Cc: patches, linux-kernel, torvalds, akpm, shuah, patches,
lkft-triage, pavel, jonathanh, f.fainelli, sudipm.mukherjee, srw,
rwarsow, conor, allen.lkml, broonie, Oleg Nesterov, linux-parisc,
James E.J. Bottomley
On 6/22/24 17:34, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> On 6/22/24 08:13, Helge Deller wrote:
>> On 6/22/24 16:58, Guenter Roeck wrote:
>>> [ Copying parisc maintainers - maybe they can test on real hardware ]
>>>
>>> On 6/19/24 05:54, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
>>>> This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 6.1.95 release.
>>>> There are 217 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 Fri, 21 Jun 2024 12:55:11 +0000.
>>>> Anything received after that time might be too late.
>>>>
>>> ...
>>>> Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>
>>>> zap_pid_ns_processes: clear TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL along with TIF_SIGPENDING
>>>>
>>>
>>> I can not explain it, but this patch causes all my parisc64 (C3700)
>>> boot tests to crash. There are lots of memory corruption BUGs such as
>>>
>>> [ 0.000000] =============================================================================
>>> [ 0.000000] BUG kmalloc-96 (Not tainted): Padding overwritten. 0x0000000043411dd0-0x0000000043411f5f @offset=3536
>>>
>>> ultimately followed by
>>>
>>> [ 0.462562] Unaligned handler failed, ret = -14
>>> ...
>>> [ 0.469160] IAOQ[0]: idr_alloc_cyclic+0x48/0x118
>>> [ 0.469372] IAOQ[1]: idr_alloc_cyclic+0x54/0x118
>>> [ 0.469548] RP(r2): __kernfs_new_node.constprop.0+0x160/0x420
>>> [ 0.469782] Backtrace:
>>> [ 0.469928] [<00000000404af108>] __kernfs_new_node.constprop.0+0x160/0x420
>>> [ 0.470285] [<00000000404b0cac>] kernfs_new_node+0xbc/0x118
>>> [ 0.470523] [<00000000404b158c>] kernfs_create_empty_dir+0x54/0xf0
>>> [ 0.470756] [<00000000404b665c>] sysfs_create_mount_point+0x4c/0xb0
>>> [ 0.470996] [<00000000401181cc>] cgroup_init+0x5b4/0x738
>>> [ 0.471213] [<0000000040102220>] start_kernel+0x1238/0x1308
>>> [ 0.471429] [<0000000040107c90>] start_parisc+0x188/0x1d0
>>> ...
>>> [ 0.474956] Kernel panic - not syncing: Attempted to kill the idle task!
>>> SeaBIOS wants SYSTEM RESET.
>>>
>>> This is with qemu v9.0.1.
>>
>> Just to be sure, did you tested the same kernel on physical hardware as well?
>>
>
> No, I don't have hardware. I only have qemu. That is why I copied you and
> the parisc mailing list.
Yes, sorry, I saw your top line in the mail after I already sent my reply....
> I would hope that someone can either confirm that
> this is a real problem or that it is qemu related. If it is qemu related,
> I'll just stop testing c3700 64-bit support with qemu on v6.1.y and other
> branches if/when the problem shows up there as well.
I just booted 6.1.95 successfully in qemu and on my physical C3700 machine.
I assume the problem can be reproduced with your .config ?
Please send it to me off-list, then I can try again.
I know there are still some issues with the 64-bit hppa emulation in qemu,
which are quite hard for me to trigger and to find the cause.
So, maybe you now found one easier-to-trigger reproducer? :-)
Helge
>> Please note, that 64-bit hppa (C3700) support in qemu was just recently added
>> and is still considered experimental.
>> So, maybe it's not a bug in the source, but in qemu...?!?
>>
>
> Sure, that is possible, though it is a bit unusual that it is only seen
> in 6.1.95 and not in any other branches or releases.
>
> In summary, please see this report as "This is a problem seen in qemu.
> It may or may not be seen on real hardware". Maybe I should add this as a
> common disclaimer to all my reports to avoid misunderstandings.
>
> Thanks,
> Guenter
>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 20+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 6.1 000/217] 6.1.95-rc1 review [parisc64/C3700 boot failures]
2024-06-22 15:49 ` Helge Deller
@ 2024-06-22 16:37 ` Guenter Roeck
2024-06-22 17:21 ` Guenter Roeck
1 sibling, 0 replies; 20+ messages in thread
From: Guenter Roeck @ 2024-06-22 16:37 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Helge Deller, Greg Kroah-Hartman, stable
Cc: patches, linux-kernel, torvalds, akpm, shuah, patches,
lkft-triage, pavel, jonathanh, f.fainelli, sudipm.mukherjee, srw,
rwarsow, conor, allen.lkml, broonie, Oleg Nesterov, linux-parisc,
James E.J. Bottomley
On 6/22/24 08:49, Helge Deller wrote:
> On 6/22/24 17:34, Guenter Roeck wrote:
>> On 6/22/24 08:13, Helge Deller wrote:
>>> On 6/22/24 16:58, Guenter Roeck wrote:
>>>> [ Copying parisc maintainers - maybe they can test on real hardware ]
>>>>
>>>> On 6/19/24 05:54, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
>>>>> This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 6.1.95 release.
>>>>> There are 217 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 Fri, 21 Jun 2024 12:55:11 +0000.
>>>>> Anything received after that time might be too late.
>>>>>
>>>> ...
>>>>> Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>
>>>>> zap_pid_ns_processes: clear TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL along with TIF_SIGPENDING
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I can not explain it, but this patch causes all my parisc64 (C3700)
>>>> boot tests to crash. There are lots of memory corruption BUGs such as
>>>>
>>>> [ 0.000000] =============================================================================
>>>> [ 0.000000] BUG kmalloc-96 (Not tainted): Padding overwritten. 0x0000000043411dd0-0x0000000043411f5f @offset=3536
>>>>
>>>> ultimately followed by
>>>>
>>>> [ 0.462562] Unaligned handler failed, ret = -14
>>>> ...
>>>> [ 0.469160] IAOQ[0]: idr_alloc_cyclic+0x48/0x118
>>>> [ 0.469372] IAOQ[1]: idr_alloc_cyclic+0x54/0x118
>>>> [ 0.469548] RP(r2): __kernfs_new_node.constprop.0+0x160/0x420
>>>> [ 0.469782] Backtrace:
>>>> [ 0.469928] [<00000000404af108>] __kernfs_new_node.constprop.0+0x160/0x420
>>>> [ 0.470285] [<00000000404b0cac>] kernfs_new_node+0xbc/0x118
>>>> [ 0.470523] [<00000000404b158c>] kernfs_create_empty_dir+0x54/0xf0
>>>> [ 0.470756] [<00000000404b665c>] sysfs_create_mount_point+0x4c/0xb0
>>>> [ 0.470996] [<00000000401181cc>] cgroup_init+0x5b4/0x738
>>>> [ 0.471213] [<0000000040102220>] start_kernel+0x1238/0x1308
>>>> [ 0.471429] [<0000000040107c90>] start_parisc+0x188/0x1d0
>>>> ...
>>>> [ 0.474956] Kernel panic - not syncing: Attempted to kill the idle task!
>>>> SeaBIOS wants SYSTEM RESET.
>>>>
>>>> This is with qemu v9.0.1.
>>>
>>> Just to be sure, did you tested the same kernel on physical hardware as well?
>>>
>>
>> No, I don't have hardware. I only have qemu. That is why I copied you and
>> the parisc mailing list.
>
> Yes, sorry, I saw your top line in the mail after I already sent my reply....
>
>> I would hope that someone can either confirm that
>> this is a real problem or that it is qemu related. If it is qemu related,
>> I'll just stop testing c3700 64-bit support with qemu on v6.1.y and other
>> branches if/when the problem shows up there as well.
>
> I just booted 6.1.95 successfully in qemu and on my physical C3700 machine.
> I assume the problem can be reproduced with your .config ?
> Please send it to me off-list, then I can try again.
>
Done.
Thanks,
Guenter
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 20+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 6.1 000/217] 6.1.95-rc1 review [parisc64/C3700 boot failures]
2024-06-22 15:49 ` Helge Deller
2024-06-22 16:37 ` Guenter Roeck
@ 2024-06-22 17:21 ` Guenter Roeck
1 sibling, 0 replies; 20+ messages in thread
From: Guenter Roeck @ 2024-06-22 17:21 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Helge Deller, Greg Kroah-Hartman, stable
Cc: patches, linux-kernel, torvalds, akpm, shuah, patches,
lkft-triage, pavel, jonathanh, f.fainelli, sudipm.mukherjee, srw,
rwarsow, conor, allen.lkml, broonie, Oleg Nesterov, linux-parisc,
James E.J. Bottomley
On 6/22/24 08:49, Helge Deller wrote:
[ ... ]
>
> I just booted 6.1.95 successfully in qemu and on my physical C3700 machine.
FWIW, I don't see the problem either if I just build and boot
generic-64bit_defconfig. Sorry, I didn't really expect this,
so I didn't mention that my configuration adds lots of debug and
unit test options.
Guenter
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 20+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 6.1 000/217] 6.1.95-rc1 review [parisc64/C3700 boot failures]
2024-06-22 15:13 ` Helge Deller
2024-06-22 15:34 ` Guenter Roeck
@ 2024-06-23 14:28 ` Guenter Roeck
1 sibling, 0 replies; 20+ messages in thread
From: Guenter Roeck @ 2024-06-23 14:28 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Helge Deller, Greg Kroah-Hartman, stable
Cc: patches, linux-kernel, torvalds, akpm, shuah, patches,
lkft-triage, pavel, jonathanh, f.fainelli, sudipm.mukherjee, srw,
rwarsow, conor, allen.lkml, broonie, Oleg Nesterov, linux-parisc,
James E.J. Bottomley
On 6/22/24 08:13, Helge Deller wrote:
> On 6/22/24 16:58, Guenter Roeck wrote:
>> [ Copying parisc maintainers - maybe they can test on real hardware ]
>>
>> On 6/19/24 05:54, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
>>> This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 6.1.95 release.
>>> There are 217 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 Fri, 21 Jun 2024 12:55:11 +0000.
>>> Anything received after that time might be too late.
>>>
>> ...
>>> Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>
>>> zap_pid_ns_processes: clear TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL along with TIF_SIGPENDING
>>>
>>
>> I can not explain it, but this patch causes all my parisc64 (C3700)
>> boot tests to crash. There are lots of memory corruption BUGs such as
>>
>> [ 0.000000] =============================================================================
>> [ 0.000000] BUG kmalloc-96 (Not tainted): Padding overwritten. 0x0000000043411dd0-0x0000000043411f5f @offset=3536
>>
>> ultimately followed by
>>
>> [ 0.462562] Unaligned handler failed, ret = -14
>> ...
>> [ 0.469160] IAOQ[0]: idr_alloc_cyclic+0x48/0x118
>> [ 0.469372] IAOQ[1]: idr_alloc_cyclic+0x54/0x118
>> [ 0.469548] RP(r2): __kernfs_new_node.constprop.0+0x160/0x420
>> [ 0.469782] Backtrace:
>> [ 0.469928] [<00000000404af108>] __kernfs_new_node.constprop.0+0x160/0x420
>> [ 0.470285] [<00000000404b0cac>] kernfs_new_node+0xbc/0x118
>> [ 0.470523] [<00000000404b158c>] kernfs_create_empty_dir+0x54/0xf0
>> [ 0.470756] [<00000000404b665c>] sysfs_create_mount_point+0x4c/0xb0
>> [ 0.470996] [<00000000401181cc>] cgroup_init+0x5b4/0x738
>> [ 0.471213] [<0000000040102220>] start_kernel+0x1238/0x1308
>> [ 0.471429] [<0000000040107c90>] start_parisc+0x188/0x1d0
>> ...
>> [ 0.474956] Kernel panic - not syncing: Attempted to kill the idle task!
>> SeaBIOS wants SYSTEM RESET.
>>
>> This is with qemu v9.0.1.
>
> Just to be sure, did you tested the same kernel on physical hardware as well?
>
> Please note, that 64-bit hppa (C3700) support in qemu was just recently added
> and is still considered experimental.
> So, maybe it's not a bug in the source, but in qemu...?!?
>
Following up on this for everyone: Helge doesn't see the problem on real hardware.
I can make the problem disappear by any of the following:
- Use gcc 13.3 instead of 12.3
- Disable CONFIG_KUNIT
- Enable CONFIG_PAGE_POISONING (without actually enabling it in the runtime)
Overall, that suggests some kind of heisenbug, most likely in qemu,
unrelated to the commit above.
Thanks, and sorry for the noise.
Guenter
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 20+ messages in thread