* Re: [PATCH 6.1 00/73] 6.1.119-rc1 review
2024-11-20 12:57 [PATCH 6.1 00/73] 6.1.119-rc1 review Greg Kroah-Hartman
@ 2024-11-20 16:45 ` Mark Brown
2024-11-20 17:01 ` SeongJae Park
` (12 subsequent siblings)
13 siblings, 0 replies; 18+ messages in thread
From: Mark Brown @ 2024-11-20 16:45 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, hargar
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 345 bytes --]
On Wed, Nov 20, 2024 at 01:57:46PM +0100, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 6.1.119 release.
> There are 73 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] 18+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH 6.1 00/73] 6.1.119-rc1 review
2024-11-20 12:57 [PATCH 6.1 00/73] 6.1.119-rc1 review Greg Kroah-Hartman
2024-11-20 16:45 ` Mark Brown
@ 2024-11-20 17:01 ` SeongJae Park
2024-11-20 18:31 ` Florian Fainelli
` (11 subsequent siblings)
13 siblings, 0 replies; 18+ messages in thread
From: SeongJae Park @ 2024-11-20 17:01 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, hargar, broonie, damon
Hello,
On Wed, 20 Nov 2024 13:57:46 +0100 Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 6.1.119 release.
> There are 73 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, 22 Nov 2024 12:57:58 +0000.
> Anything received after that time might be too late.
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/damonitor/damon-tests/tree/next/corr
[2] 43ca6897c30a ("Linux 6.1.119-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 # SKIP
ok 12 selftests: damon-tests: build_m68k.sh # SKIP
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] 18+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH 6.1 00/73] 6.1.119-rc1 review
2024-11-20 12:57 [PATCH 6.1 00/73] 6.1.119-rc1 review Greg Kroah-Hartman
2024-11-20 16:45 ` Mark Brown
2024-11-20 17:01 ` SeongJae Park
@ 2024-11-20 18:31 ` Florian Fainelli
2024-11-20 23:22 ` Shuah Khan
` (10 subsequent siblings)
13 siblings, 0 replies; 18+ messages in thread
From: Florian Fainelli @ 2024-11-20 18:31 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, hargar, broonie
On 11/20/24 04:57, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 6.1.119 release.
> There are 73 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, 22 Nov 2024 12:57:58 +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-6.1.119-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] 18+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH 6.1 00/73] 6.1.119-rc1 review
2024-11-20 12:57 [PATCH 6.1 00/73] 6.1.119-rc1 review Greg Kroah-Hartman
` (2 preceding siblings ...)
2024-11-20 18:31 ` Florian Fainelli
@ 2024-11-20 23:22 ` Shuah Khan
2024-11-21 4:26 ` Ron Economos
` (9 subsequent siblings)
13 siblings, 0 replies; 18+ messages in thread
From: Shuah Khan @ 2024-11-20 23:22 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, hargar, broonie, Shuah Khan
On 11/20/24 05:57, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 6.1.119 release.
> There are 73 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, 22 Nov 2024 12:57:58 +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-6.1.119-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] 18+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH 6.1 00/73] 6.1.119-rc1 review
2024-11-20 12:57 [PATCH 6.1 00/73] 6.1.119-rc1 review Greg Kroah-Hartman
` (3 preceding siblings ...)
2024-11-20 23:22 ` Shuah Khan
@ 2024-11-21 4:26 ` Ron Economos
2024-11-21 8:32 ` Naresh Kamboju
` (8 subsequent siblings)
13 siblings, 0 replies; 18+ messages in thread
From: Ron Economos @ 2024-11-21 4:26 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, hargar, broonie
On 11/20/24 04:57, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 6.1.119 release.
> There are 73 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, 22 Nov 2024 12:57:58 +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-6.1.119-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] 18+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH 6.1 00/73] 6.1.119-rc1 review
2024-11-20 12:57 [PATCH 6.1 00/73] 6.1.119-rc1 review Greg Kroah-Hartman
` (4 preceding siblings ...)
2024-11-21 4:26 ` Ron Economos
@ 2024-11-21 8:32 ` Naresh Kamboju
2024-11-21 9:02 ` Pavel Machek
` (7 subsequent siblings)
13 siblings, 0 replies; 18+ messages in thread
From: Naresh Kamboju @ 2024-11-21 8:32 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, hargar, broonie
On Wed, 20 Nov 2024 at 18:31, Greg Kroah-Hartman
<gregkh@linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
>
> This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 6.1.119 release.
> There are 73 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, 22 Nov 2024 12:57:58 +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-6.1.119-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
The parisc builds failed on stable-rc linux-6.1.y.
* parisc, build
- gcc-11-allmodconfig
- gcc-11-allnoconfig
- gcc-11-defconfig
- gcc-11-tinyconfig
Build log:
---------
In file included from include/linux/skbuff.h:31,
from include/net/net_namespace.h:43,
from fs/nfs_common/grace.c:9:
include/linux/dma-mapping.h:546:47: error: macro "cache_line_size"
passed 1 arguments, but takes just 0
546 | static inline int dma_get_cache_alignment(void)
|
Reported-by: Linux Kernel Functional Testing <lkft@linaro.org>
Links:
- https://qa-reports.linaro.org/lkft/linux-stable-rc-linux-6.1.y/build/v6.1.118-74-g43ca6897c30a/testrun/25943312/suite/build/test/gcc-11-defconfig/log
- https://qa-reports.linaro.org/lkft/linux-stable-rc-linux-6.1.y/build/v6.1.118-74-g43ca6897c30a/testrun/25943312/suite/build/test/gcc-11-defconfig/details/
## Build
* kernel: 6.1.119-rc1
* git: https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/stable/linux-stable-rc.git
* git commit: 43ca6897c30a8511928abff403a2977ca7b33ab8
* git describe: v6.1.118-74-g43ca6897c30a
* test details:
https://qa-reports.linaro.org/lkft/linux-stable-rc-linux-6.1.y/build/v6.1.118-74-g43ca6897c30a
## Test Regressions (compared to v6.1.116-139-gb9e54d0ed258)
* parisc, build
- gcc-11-allmodconfig
- gcc-11-allnoconfig
- gcc-11-defconfig
- gcc-11-tinyconfig
## Metric Regressions (compared to v6.1.116-139-gb9e54d0ed258)
## Test Fixes (compared to v6.1.116-139-gb9e54d0ed258)
## Metric Fixes (compared to v6.1.116-139-gb9e54d0ed258)
## Test result summary
total: 93097, pass: 73479, fail: 1803, skip: 17732, xfail: 83
## Build Summary
* arc: 5 total, 5 passed, 0 failed
* arm: 134 total, 134 passed, 0 failed
* arm64: 40 total, 40 passed, 0 failed
* i386: 27 total, 25 passed, 2 failed
* mips: 26 total, 25 passed, 1 failed
* parisc: 4 total, 0 passed, 4 failed
* powerpc: 32 total, 31 passed, 1 failed
* riscv: 11 total, 11 passed, 0 failed
* s390: 14 total, 14 passed, 0 failed
* sh: 10 total, 10 passed, 0 failed
* sparc: 7 total, 7 passed, 0 failed
* x86_64: 32 total, 32 passed, 0 failed
## Test suites summary
* boot
* commands
* kselftest-arm64
* kselftest-breakpoints
* kselftest-capabilities
* kselftest-cgroup
* kselftest-clone3
* kselftest-core
* kselftest-cpu-hotplug
* kselftest-cpufreq
* 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-kcmp
* kselftest-kvm
* kselftest-livepatch
* kselftest-membarrier
* kselftest-memfd
* kselftest-mincore
* kselftest-mqueue
* kselftest-net
* kselftest-net-mptcp
* kselftest-openat2
* kselftest-ptrace
* kselftest-rseq
* kselftest-rtc
* kselftest-seccomp
* kselftest-sigaltstack
* kselftest-size
* kselftest-tc-testing
* kselftest-timers
* kselftest-tmpfs
* kselftest-tpm2
* kselftest-user_events
* kselftest-vDSO
* kselftest-watchdog
* kselftest-x86
* kunit
* kvm-unit-tests
* libgpiod
* libhugetlbfs
* 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-syscalls
* ltp-tracing
* perf
* rcutorture
--
Linaro LKFT
https://lkft.linaro.org
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH 6.1 00/73] 6.1.119-rc1 review
2024-11-20 12:57 [PATCH 6.1 00/73] 6.1.119-rc1 review Greg Kroah-Hartman
` (5 preceding siblings ...)
2024-11-21 8:32 ` Naresh Kamboju
@ 2024-11-21 9:02 ` Pavel Machek
2024-11-21 16:50 ` Hardik Garg
` (6 subsequent siblings)
13 siblings, 0 replies; 18+ messages in thread
From: Pavel Machek @ 2024-11-21 9:02 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, hargar, broonie
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 659 bytes --]
Hi!
> This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 6.1.119 release.
> There are 73 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] 18+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH 6.1 00/73] 6.1.119-rc1 review
2024-11-20 12:57 [PATCH 6.1 00/73] 6.1.119-rc1 review Greg Kroah-Hartman
` (6 preceding siblings ...)
2024-11-21 9:02 ` Pavel Machek
@ 2024-11-21 16:50 ` Hardik Garg
2024-11-21 19:39 ` Jon Hunter
` (5 subsequent siblings)
13 siblings, 0 replies; 18+ messages in thread
From: Hardik Garg @ 2024-11-21 16:50 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Greg Kroah-Hartman, stable@vger.kernel.org
Cc: 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,
broonie@kernel.org
The kernel, modules, BPF tool, and kselftest tool for 6.1.119-rc1 builds successfully on both amd64 and arm64 Azure Linux VMs.
Tested-by: Hardik Garg hargar@linux.microsoft.com
Thanks,
Hardik
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH 6.1 00/73] 6.1.119-rc1 review
2024-11-20 12:57 [PATCH 6.1 00/73] 6.1.119-rc1 review Greg Kroah-Hartman
` (7 preceding siblings ...)
2024-11-21 16:50 ` Hardik Garg
@ 2024-11-21 19:39 ` Jon Hunter
2024-11-22 6:59 ` Muhammad Usama Anjum
` (4 subsequent siblings)
13 siblings, 0 replies; 18+ messages in thread
From: Jon Hunter @ 2024-11-21 19:39 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, hargar, broonie,
linux-tegra, stable
On Wed, 20 Nov 2024 13:57:46 +0100, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 6.1.119 release.
> There are 73 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, 22 Nov 2024 12:57:58 +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-6.1.119-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
115 tests: 115 pass, 0 fail
Linux version: 6.1.119-rc1-g43ca6897c30a
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] 18+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH 6.1 00/73] 6.1.119-rc1 review
2024-11-20 12:57 [PATCH 6.1 00/73] 6.1.119-rc1 review Greg Kroah-Hartman
` (8 preceding siblings ...)
2024-11-21 19:39 ` Jon Hunter
@ 2024-11-22 6:59 ` Muhammad Usama Anjum
2024-11-22 13:55 ` Yann Sionneau
` (3 subsequent siblings)
13 siblings, 0 replies; 18+ messages in thread
From: Muhammad Usama Anjum @ 2024-11-22 6:59 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Greg Kroah-Hartman, stable
Cc: Usama.Anjum, patches, linux-kernel, torvalds, akpm, linux, shuah,
patches, lkft-triage, pavel, jonathanh, f.fainelli,
sudipm.mukherjee, srw, rwarsow, conor, hargar, broonie
On 11/20/24 5:57 PM, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 6.1.119 release.
> There are 73 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, 22 Nov 2024 12:57:58 +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-6.1.119-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
>
OVERVIEW
Builds: 36 passed, 0 failed
Boot tests: 476 passed, 0 failed
CI systems: broonie, maestro
REVISION
Commit
name: v6.1.118-74-g43ca6897c30a
hash: 43ca6897c30a8511928abff403a2977ca7b33ab8
Checked out from
https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/stable/linux-stable-rc.git linux-6.1.y
BUILDS
No build failures found
BOOT TESTS
No boot failures found
See complete and up-to-date report at:
https://kcidb.kernelci.org/d/revision/revision?orgId=1&var-git_commit_hash=43ca6897c30a8511928abff403a2977ca7b33ab8&var-patchset_hash=
Tested-by: kernelci.org bot <bot@kernelci.org>
Thanks,
KernelCI team
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH 6.1 00/73] 6.1.119-rc1 review
2024-11-20 12:57 [PATCH 6.1 00/73] 6.1.119-rc1 review Greg Kroah-Hartman
` (9 preceding siblings ...)
2024-11-22 6:59 ` Muhammad Usama Anjum
@ 2024-11-22 13:55 ` Yann Sionneau
2024-11-23 7:25 ` Pavel Machek
` (2 subsequent siblings)
13 siblings, 0 replies; 18+ messages in thread
From: Yann Sionneau @ 2024-11-22 13:55 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, hargar, broonie
Hi Greg,
On 20/11/2024 13:57, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 6.1.119 release.
> There are 73 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, 22 Nov 2024 12:57:58 +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-6.1.119-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,
I tested 6.1.119-rc1 (43ca6897c30a8) on Kalray kvx arch (not upstream yet) and everything looks good!
It ran on real hw (k200, k200lp and k300 boards), on qemu and on our internal instruction set simulator (ISS).
Tests were run on several interfaces/drivers (usb, qsfp ethernet, eMMC, PCIe endpoint+RC, SPI, remoteproc, uart, iommu). LTP and uClibc-ng testsuites are also run without any regression.
Everything looks fine to us.
Tested-by: Yann Sionneau <ysionneau@kalrayinc.com>
-- Yann
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH 6.1 00/73] 6.1.119-rc1 review
2024-11-20 12:57 [PATCH 6.1 00/73] 6.1.119-rc1 review Greg Kroah-Hartman
` (10 preceding siblings ...)
2024-11-22 13:55 ` Yann Sionneau
@ 2024-11-23 7:25 ` Pavel Machek
2024-11-23 16:11 ` Chuck Lever III
2024-11-23 15:47 ` Guenter Roeck
2024-11-28 17:54 ` Pavel Machek
13 siblings, 1 reply; 18+ messages in thread
From: Pavel Machek @ 2024-11-23 7:25 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, hargar, broonie, seanjc,
chuck.lever
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1644 bytes --]
Hi!
> This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 6.1.119 release.
> There are 73 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.
> Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>
> KVM: VMX: Bury Intel PT virtualization (guest/host mode) behind
> CONFIG_BROKEN
So... someone is passing kernel command line parameter, and setup
works for him, now we start silently ignoring that parameter? That is
pretty unfriendly.
> Chuck Lever <chuck.lever@oracle.com>
> NFSD: Limit the number of concurrent async COPY operations
@@ -1782,10 +1783,16 @@ nfsd4_copy(struct svc_rqst *rqstp, struct nfsd4_compound_state *cstate,
if (nfsd4_copy_is_async(copy)) {
- status = nfserrno(-ENOMEM);
async_copy = kzalloc(sizeof(struct nfsd4_copy), GFP_KERNEL);
if (!async_copy)
goto out_err;
This is wrong. Status is success from previous code, and you are now
returning it in case of error.
(Also, the atomic dance does not work. It will not allow desired
concurency in case of races. Semaphore is canonical solution for
this.)
> Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
> mm: revert "mm: shmem: fix data-race in shmem_getattr()"
No problem with this patch, but please remember this next time you
apply "no real bug but warnings are bad" change...
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] 18+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH 6.1 00/73] 6.1.119-rc1 review
2024-11-23 7:25 ` Pavel Machek
@ 2024-11-23 16:11 ` Chuck Lever III
2024-11-23 17:47 ` Pavel Machek
0 siblings, 1 reply; 18+ messages in thread
From: Chuck Lever III @ 2024-11-23 16:11 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Pavel Machek
Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman, linux-stable, patches@lists.linux.dev,
Linux Kernel Mailing List, Linus Torvalds, Andrew Morton,
Guenter Roeck, shuah@kernel.org, patches@kernelci.org,
lkft-triage@lists.linaro.org, Jon Hunter, f.fainelli@gmail.com,
sudipm.mukherjee@gmail.com, srw@sladewatkins.net, rwarsow@gmx.de,
conor@kernel.org, hargar@microsoft.com, broonie@kernel.org,
seanjc@google.com
> On Nov 23, 2024, at 2:25 AM, Pavel Machek <pavel@denx.de> wrote:
>
> Hi!
>
>> This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 6.1.119 release.
>> There are 73 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.
>
>> Chuck Lever <chuck.lever@oracle.com>
>> NFSD: Limit the number of concurrent async COPY operations
>
> @@ -1782,10 +1783,16 @@ nfsd4_copy(struct svc_rqst *rqstp, struct nfsd4_compound_state *cstate,
> if (nfsd4_copy_is_async(copy)) {
> - status = nfserrno(-ENOMEM);
> async_copy = kzalloc(sizeof(struct nfsd4_copy), GFP_KERNEL);
> if (!async_copy)
> goto out_err;
>
> This is wrong. Status is success from previous code, and you are now
> returning it in case of error.
This "status =" line was removed because the out_err: label
unconditionally sets status = nfserr_jukebox.
> (Also, the atomic dance does not work. It will not allow desired
> concurency in case of races. Semaphore is canonical solution for
> this.)
I'm not certain which "atomic dance" you are referring to here.
Do you mean:
1792 if (atomic_inc_return(&nn->pending_async_copies) >
1793 (int)rqstp->rq_pool->sp_nrthreads)
1794 goto out_err;
The cap doesn't have to be perfect; it just has to make sure
that the pending value doesn't underflow or overflow. Note
that this code is updated in a later patch.
Naturally we have to address any issues in upstream first, so
please report issues and propose changes to
linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org <mailto:linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org> . Thanks for the review!
--
Chuck Lever
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH 6.1 00/73] 6.1.119-rc1 review
2024-11-23 16:11 ` Chuck Lever III
@ 2024-11-23 17:47 ` Pavel Machek
0 siblings, 0 replies; 18+ messages in thread
From: Pavel Machek @ 2024-11-23 17:47 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Chuck Lever III
Cc: Pavel Machek, Greg Kroah-Hartman, linux-stable,
patches@lists.linux.dev, Linux Kernel Mailing List,
Linus Torvalds, Andrew Morton, Guenter Roeck, shuah@kernel.org,
patches@kernelci.org, lkft-triage@lists.linaro.org, Jon Hunter,
f.fainelli@gmail.com, sudipm.mukherjee@gmail.com,
srw@sladewatkins.net, rwarsow@gmx.de, conor@kernel.org,
hargar@microsoft.com, broonie@kernel.org, seanjc@google.com
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1882 bytes --]
Hi!
> >> This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 6.1.119 release.
> >> There are 73 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.
> >
> >> Chuck Lever <chuck.lever@oracle.com>
> >> NFSD: Limit the number of concurrent async COPY operations
> >
> > @@ -1782,10 +1783,16 @@ nfsd4_copy(struct svc_rqst *rqstp, struct nfsd4_compound_state *cstate,
> > if (nfsd4_copy_is_async(copy)) {
> > - status = nfserrno(-ENOMEM);
> > async_copy = kzalloc(sizeof(struct nfsd4_copy), GFP_KERNEL);
> > if (!async_copy)
> > goto out_err;
> >
> > This is wrong. Status is success from previous code, and you are now
> > returning it in case of error.
>
> This "status =" line was removed because the out_err: label
> unconditionally sets status = nfserr_jukebox.
Aha, I see, sorry, I missed that detail.
> > (Also, the atomic dance does not work. It will not allow desired
> > concurency in case of races. Semaphore is canonical solution for
> > this.)
>
> I'm not certain which "atomic dance" you are referring to here.
> Do you mean:
>
> 1792 if (atomic_inc_return(&nn->pending_async_copies) >
> 1793 (int)rqstp->rq_pool->sp_nrthreads)
> 1794 goto out_err;
>
> The cap doesn't have to be perfect; it just has to make sure
> that the pending value doesn't underflow or overflow. Note
> that this code is updated in a later patch.
The cap is not perfect, indeed. I'll take your word it does not matter.
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] 18+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 6.1 00/73] 6.1.119-rc1 review
2024-11-20 12:57 [PATCH 6.1 00/73] 6.1.119-rc1 review Greg Kroah-Hartman
` (11 preceding siblings ...)
2024-11-23 7:25 ` Pavel Machek
@ 2024-11-23 15:47 ` Guenter Roeck
2024-12-02 13:02 ` Greg Kroah-Hartman
2024-11-28 17:54 ` Pavel Machek
13 siblings, 1 reply; 18+ messages in thread
From: Guenter Roeck @ 2024-11-23 15:47 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, hargar, broonie
On 11/20/24 04:57, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 6.1.119 release.
> There are 73 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, 22 Nov 2024 12:57:58 +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-6.1.119-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
>
> -------------
> Pseudo-Shortlog of commits:
>
> Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
> Linux 6.1.119-rc1
>
> Michal Luczaj <mhal@rbox.co>
> net: Make copy_safe_from_sockptr() match documentation
>
> Eli Billauer <eli.billauer@gmail.com>
> char: xillybus: Fix trivial bug with mutex
>
> Mikulas Patocka <mpatocka@redhat.com>
> parisc: fix a possible DMA corruption
>
This results in:
include/linux/slab.h:229: warning: "ARCH_KMALLOC_MINALIGN" redefined
229 | #define ARCH_KMALLOC_MINALIGN ARCH_DMA_MINALIGN
|
In file included from include/linux/cache.h:6,
from include/linux/mmzone.h:12,
from include/linux/gfp.h:7,
from include/linux/mm.h:7:
arch/parisc/include/asm/cache.h:28: note: this is the location of the previous definition
28 | #define ARCH_KMALLOC_MINALIGN 16 /* ldcw requires 16-byte alignment */
because commit 4ab5f8ec7d71a ("mm/slab: decouple ARCH_KMALLOC_MINALIGN
from ARCH_DMA_MINALIGN") was not applied as well.
Then there is
include/linux/dma-mapping.h:546:47: error: macro "cache_line_size" passed 1 arguments, but takes just 0
546 | static inline int dma_get_cache_alignment(void)
| ^
arch/parisc/include/asm/cache.h:31: note: macro "cache_line_size" defined here
31 | #define cache_line_size() dcache_stride
|
include/linux/dma-mapping.h:547:1: error: expected '=', ',', ';', 'asm' or '__attribute__' before '{' token
because commit 8c57da28dc3df ("dma: allow dma_get_cache_alignment()
to be overridden by the arch code") is missing as well.
Those two patches fix the compile errors. I have not tested if the resulting
images boot.
Guenter
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH 6.1 00/73] 6.1.119-rc1 review
2024-11-23 15:47 ` Guenter Roeck
@ 2024-12-02 13:02 ` Greg Kroah-Hartman
0 siblings, 0 replies; 18+ messages in thread
From: Greg Kroah-Hartman @ 2024-12-02 13:02 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Guenter Roeck
Cc: stable, patches, linux-kernel, torvalds, akpm, shuah, patches,
lkft-triage, pavel, jonathanh, f.fainelli, sudipm.mukherjee, srw,
rwarsow, conor, hargar, broonie
On Sat, Nov 23, 2024 at 07:47:09AM -0800, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> On 11/20/24 04:57, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> > This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 6.1.119 release.
> > There are 73 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, 22 Nov 2024 12:57:58 +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-6.1.119-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
> >
> > -------------
> > Pseudo-Shortlog of commits:
> >
> > Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
> > Linux 6.1.119-rc1
> >
> > Michal Luczaj <mhal@rbox.co>
> > net: Make copy_safe_from_sockptr() match documentation
> >
> > Eli Billauer <eli.billauer@gmail.com>
> > char: xillybus: Fix trivial bug with mutex
> >
> > Mikulas Patocka <mpatocka@redhat.com>
> > parisc: fix a possible DMA corruption
> >
>
> This results in:
>
> include/linux/slab.h:229: warning: "ARCH_KMALLOC_MINALIGN" redefined
> 229 | #define ARCH_KMALLOC_MINALIGN ARCH_DMA_MINALIGN
> |
> In file included from include/linux/cache.h:6,
> from include/linux/mmzone.h:12,
> from include/linux/gfp.h:7,
> from include/linux/mm.h:7:
> arch/parisc/include/asm/cache.h:28: note: this is the location of the previous definition
> 28 | #define ARCH_KMALLOC_MINALIGN 16 /* ldcw requires 16-byte alignment */
>
> because commit 4ab5f8ec7d71a ("mm/slab: decouple ARCH_KMALLOC_MINALIGN
> from ARCH_DMA_MINALIGN") was not applied as well.
>
> Then there is
>
> include/linux/dma-mapping.h:546:47: error: macro "cache_line_size" passed 1 arguments, but takes just 0
> 546 | static inline int dma_get_cache_alignment(void)
> | ^
> arch/parisc/include/asm/cache.h:31: note: macro "cache_line_size" defined here
> 31 | #define cache_line_size() dcache_stride
> |
> include/linux/dma-mapping.h:547:1: error: expected '=', ',', ';', 'asm' or '__attribute__' before '{' token
>
> because commit 8c57da28dc3df ("dma: allow dma_get_cache_alignment()
> to be overridden by the arch code") is missing as well.
>
> Those two patches fix the compile errors. I have not tested if the resulting
> images boot.
Thanks, I'll go queue them up now.
greg k-h
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 6.1 00/73] 6.1.119-rc1 review
2024-11-20 12:57 [PATCH 6.1 00/73] 6.1.119-rc1 review Greg Kroah-Hartman
` (12 preceding siblings ...)
2024-11-23 15:47 ` Guenter Roeck
@ 2024-11-28 17:54 ` Pavel Machek
13 siblings, 0 replies; 18+ messages in thread
From: Pavel Machek @ 2024-11-28 17:54 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Greg Kroah-Hartman, lukas.bulwahn
Cc: stable, patches, linux-kernel, torvalds, akpm, linux, shuah,
patches, lkft-triage, pavel, jonathanh, f.fainelli,
sudipm.mukherjee, srw, rwarsow, conor, hargar, broonie
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1053 bytes --]
Hi!
> This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 6.1.119 release.
> There are 73 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.
> Lukas Bulwahn <lukas.bulwahn@gmail.com>
> Bluetooth: hci_event: Remove code to removed CONFIG_BT_HS
I don't think we should have this in 6.1, we still have BT_HS
supported in 6.1, for example.
IMO this should be reverted.
arch/loongarch/configs/loongson3_defconfig:CONFIG_BT_HS=y
net/bluetooth/Kconfig:config BT_HS
net/bluetooth/Makefile:bluetooth-$(CONFIG_BT_HS) += a2mp.o amp.o
net/bluetooth/a2mp.h:#if IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_BT_HS)
net/bluetooth/amp.h:#if IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_BT_HS)
net/bluetooth/mgmt.c: if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_BT_HS))
net/bluetooth/mgmt.c: if (!IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_BT_HS))
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] 18+ messages in thread