[PATCH 6.1 00/15] 6.1.48-rc1 review

[PATCH 6.1 00/15] 6.1.48-rc1 review

[Greg Kroah-Hartman]

This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 6.1.48 release.
There are 15 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 Sat, 26 Aug 2023 14:14:28 +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-6.1.48-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 6.1.48-rc1

Borislav Petkov (AMD) <bp@alien8.de>
    x86/srso: Correct the mitigation status when SMT is disabled

Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
    objtool/x86: Fixup frame-pointer vs rethunk

Petr Pavlu <petr.pavlu@suse.com>
    x86/retpoline,kprobes: Fix position of thunk sections with CONFIG_LTO_CLANG

Borislav Petkov (AMD) <bp@alien8.de>
    x86/srso: Disable the mitigation on unaffected configurations

Borislav Petkov (AMD) <bp@alien8.de>
    x86/CPU/AMD: Fix the DIV(0) initial fix attempt

Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>
    x86/retpoline: Don't clobber RFLAGS during srso_safe_ret()

Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
    x86/static_call: Fix __static_call_fixup()

Borislav Petkov (AMD) <bp@alien8.de>
    x86/srso: Explain the untraining sequences a bit more

Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
    x86/cpu: Cleanup the untrain mess

Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
    x86/cpu: Rename srso_(.*)_alias to srso_alias_\1

Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
    x86/cpu: Rename original retbleed methods

Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
    x86/cpu: Clean up SRSO return thunk mess

Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
    x86/alternative: Make custom return thunk unconditional

Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
    x86/cpu: Fix up srso_safe_ret() and __x86_return_thunk()

Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
    x86/cpu: Fix __x86_return_thunk symbol type


-------------

Diffstat:

 Documentation/admin-guide/hw-vuln/srso.rst |   4 +-
 Makefile                                   |   4 +-
 arch/x86/include/asm/entry-common.h        |   1 +
 arch/x86/include/asm/nospec-branch.h       |  28 +++---
 arch/x86/kernel/cpu/amd.c                  |   1 +
 arch/x86/kernel/cpu/bugs.c                 |  28 +++++-
 arch/x86/kernel/static_call.c              |  13 +++
 arch/x86/kernel/traps.c                    |   2 -
 arch/x86/kernel/vmlinux.lds.S              |  20 ++--
 arch/x86/kvm/svm/svm.c                     |   2 +
 arch/x86/lib/retpoline.S                   | 141 ++++++++++++++++++++---------
 tools/objtool/arch/x86/decode.c            |   2 +-
 tools/objtool/check.c                      |  21 +++--
 13 files changed, 182 insertions(+), 85 deletions(-)

Re: [PATCH 6.1 00/15] 6.1.48-rc1 review

[Florian Fainelli]

On 8/24/23 07:14, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 6.1.48 release.
> There are 15 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 Sat, 26 Aug 2023 14:14:28 +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-6.1.48-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>

I was not testing system wide suspend resume until recently and am 
seeing various issues with drivers that implement resume_noirq, but only 
on a specific platform, see below. I will see about bisecting that at 
some point.

[   15.856930] Disabling non-boot CPUs ...
[   15.862349] CPU1 killed.
[   15.865684] Enabling non-boot CPUs ...
[   15.870067] CPU1 is up
[   15.872627] brcm-gisb-arb 47c400000.gisb-arb: PM: calling 
brcmstb_gisb_arb_resume_noirq+0x0/0x60 @ 1147, parent: rdb
[   15.883177] brcm-gisb-arb 47c400000.gisb-arb: PM: 
brcmstb_gisb_arb_resume_noirq+0x0/0x60 returned 0 after 2 usecs
[   15.893893] bcmgenet 47d580000.ethernet: PM: calling 
bcmgenet_resume_noirq+0x0/0xc0 @ 1147, parent: rdb
[   15.903611] bcmgenet 47d580000.ethernet: PM: 
bcmgenet_resume_noirq+0x0/0xc0 returned 0 after 303 usecs
[   36.902964] rcu: INFO: rcu_sched self-detected stall on CPU
[   36.908533] rcu:     0-....: (20991 ticks this GP) 
idle=0b1c/1/0x40000002 softirq=1785/1785 fqs=5251
[   36.917402]  (t=21008 jiffies g=1237 q=1 ncpus=2)
[   36.922104] CPU: 0 PID: 1147 Comm: rtcwake Not tainted 
6.1.45-g02e3f13ba3f3 #2
[   36.929321] Hardware name: Broadcom STB (Flattened Device Tree)
[   36.935234] PC is at _raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore+0x24/0x28
[   36.940719] LR is at resume_irqs+0x9c/0x138
[   36.944899] pc : [<c0d61f80>]    lr : [<c028c9e0>]    psr: 00030113
[   36.951159] sp : d1165e28  ip : c391f200  fp : c2204d00
[   36.956376] r10: c235e344  r9 : 40030113  r8 : c391f26c
[   36.961593] r7 : 00000000  r6 : c22489c0  r5 : 00000030  r4 : c391f200
[   36.968113] r3 : 0000000e  r2 : 00000500  r1 : 40030113  r0 : c391f26c
[   36.974634] Flags: nzcv  IRQs on  FIQs on  Mode SVC_32  ISA ARM 
Segment user
[   36.981763] Control: 30c5383d  Table: 036d12c0  DAC: fffffffd
[   36.987511]  _raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore from resume_irqs+0x9c/0x138
[   36.993865]  resume_irqs from dpm_resume_noirq+0x14/0x1c
[   36.999178]  dpm_resume_noirq from suspend_devices_and_enter+0x23c/0x890
[   37.005884]  suspend_devices_and_enter from pm_suspend+0x39c/0x414
[   37.012063]  pm_suspend from state_store+0x74/0xd4
[   37.016852]  state_store from kernfs_fop_write_iter+0x10c/0x1c4
[   37.022779]  kernfs_fop_write_iter from vfs_write+0x24c/0x354
[   37.028532]  vfs_write from ksys_write+0x60/0xd8
[   37.033148]  ksys_write from ret_fast_syscall+0x0/0x4c
[   37.038285] Exception stack(0xd1165fa8 to 0xd1165ff0)
[   37.043330] 5fa0:                   00000004 004ab3e8 00000004 
004ab3e8 00000004 00000000
[   37.051502] 5fc0: 00000004 004ab3e8 004aa180 00000004 b6ef6b2c 
0ee6b280 004aa180 0049703b
[   37.059673] 5fe0: 0000006c be89fb30 b6e21150 b6e7abbc

-- 
Florian

Re: [PATCH 6.1 00/15] 6.1.48-rc1 review

[SeongJae Park]

Hello,

On Thu, 24 Aug 2023 16:14:56 +0200 Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org> wrote:

> This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 6.1.48 release.
> There are 15 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 Sat, 26 Aug 2023 14:14:28 +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-6.1.48-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] c079d0dd788a ("Linux 6.1.48-rc1")

Thanks,
SJ

[...]

---

# .config:1408:warning: override: reassigning to symbol CGROUPS
ok 15 selftests: damon-tests: build_nomemcg.sh
# kselftest dir '/home/sjpark/damon-tests-cont/linux/tools/testing/selftests/damon-tests' is in dirty state.
# the log is at '/home/sjpark/log'.
 [32m
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_m68k.sh
ok 12 selftests: damon-tests: build_arm64.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
_remote_run_corr.sh SUCCESS

Re: [PATCH 6.1 00/15] 6.1.48-rc1 review

[Joel Fernandes]

On Thu, Aug 24, 2023 at 04:14:56PM +0200, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 6.1.48 release.
> There are 15 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 Sat, 26 Aug 2023 14:14:28 +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-6.1.48-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

For RCU,
Tested-by: Joel Fernandes (Google) <joel@joelfernandes.org>

thanks,

 - Joel


> 
> -------------
> Pseudo-Shortlog of commits:
> 
> Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
>     Linux 6.1.48-rc1
> 
> Borislav Petkov (AMD) <bp@alien8.de>
>     x86/srso: Correct the mitigation status when SMT is disabled
> 
> Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
>     objtool/x86: Fixup frame-pointer vs rethunk
> 
> Petr Pavlu <petr.pavlu@suse.com>
>     x86/retpoline,kprobes: Fix position of thunk sections with CONFIG_LTO_CLANG
> 
> Borislav Petkov (AMD) <bp@alien8.de>
>     x86/srso: Disable the mitigation on unaffected configurations
> 
> Borislav Petkov (AMD) <bp@alien8.de>
>     x86/CPU/AMD: Fix the DIV(0) initial fix attempt
> 
> Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>
>     x86/retpoline: Don't clobber RFLAGS during srso_safe_ret()
> 
> Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
>     x86/static_call: Fix __static_call_fixup()
> 
> Borislav Petkov (AMD) <bp@alien8.de>
>     x86/srso: Explain the untraining sequences a bit more
> 
> Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
>     x86/cpu: Cleanup the untrain mess
> 
> Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
>     x86/cpu: Rename srso_(.*)_alias to srso_alias_\1
> 
> Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
>     x86/cpu: Rename original retbleed methods
> 
> Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
>     x86/cpu: Clean up SRSO return thunk mess
> 
> Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
>     x86/alternative: Make custom return thunk unconditional
> 
> Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
>     x86/cpu: Fix up srso_safe_ret() and __x86_return_thunk()
> 
> Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
>     x86/cpu: Fix __x86_return_thunk symbol type
> 
> 
> -------------
> 
> Diffstat:
> 
>  Documentation/admin-guide/hw-vuln/srso.rst |   4 +-
>  Makefile                                   |   4 +-
>  arch/x86/include/asm/entry-common.h        |   1 +
>  arch/x86/include/asm/nospec-branch.h       |  28 +++---
>  arch/x86/kernel/cpu/amd.c                  |   1 +
>  arch/x86/kernel/cpu/bugs.c                 |  28 +++++-
>  arch/x86/kernel/static_call.c              |  13 +++
>  arch/x86/kernel/traps.c                    |   2 -
>  arch/x86/kernel/vmlinux.lds.S              |  20 ++--
>  arch/x86/kvm/svm/svm.c                     |   2 +
>  arch/x86/lib/retpoline.S                   | 141 ++++++++++++++++++++---------
>  tools/objtool/arch/x86/decode.c            |   2 +-
>  tools/objtool/check.c                      |  21 +++--
>  13 files changed, 182 insertions(+), 85 deletions(-)
> 
> 

Re: [PATCH 6.1 00/15] 6.1.48-rc1 review

[Florian Fainelli]

On 8/24/2023 2:31 PM, Florian Fainelli wrote:
> On 8/24/23 07:14, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
>> This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 6.1.48 release.
>> There are 15 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 Sat, 26 Aug 2023 14:14:28 +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-6.1.48-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>
> 
> I was not testing system wide suspend resume until recently and am 
> seeing various issues with drivers that implement resume_noirq, but only 
> on a specific platform, see below. I will see about bisecting that at 
> some point.

This appears to be specific to drivers/rtc/rtc-brcmstb-waketimer.c 
nothing to be worried about for now.
-- 
Florian

Re: [PATCH 6.1 00/15] 6.1.48-rc1 review

[Naresh Kamboju]

+ linux-nfs and more

On Thu, 24 Aug 2023 at 19:45, Greg Kroah-Hartman
<gregkh@linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
>
> This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 6.1.48 release.
> There are 15 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 Sat, 26 Aug 2023 14:14:28 +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-6.1.48-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


Following test regression found on stable-rc 6.1.
Rpi4 is using NFS mount rootfs and running LTP syscalls testing.
chown02 tests creating testfile2 on NFS mounted and validating
the functionality and found that it was a failure.

This is already been reported by others on lore and fix patch merged
into stable-rc linux-6.4.y [1] and [2].

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

Test log:
--------
chown02.c:46: TPASS: chown(testfile1, 0, 0) passed
chown02.c:46: TPASS: chown(testfile2, 0, 0) passed
chown02.c:58: TFAIL: testfile2: wrong mode permissions 0100700, expected 0102700

fchown02.c:57: TPASS: fchown(3, 0, 0) passed
fchown02.c:57: TPASS: fchown(4, 0, 0) passed
fchown02.c:67: TFAIL: testfile2: wrong mode permissions 0100700,
expected 0102700


## Build
* kernel: 6.1.48-rc1
* git: https://gitlab.com/Linaro/lkft/mirrors/stable/linux-stable-rc
* git branch: linux-6.1.y
* git commit: c079d0dd788ad4fe887ee6349fe89d23d72f7696
* git describe: v6.1.47-16-gc079d0dd788a
* test details:
https://qa-reports.linaro.org/lkft/linux-stable-rc-linux-6.1.y/build/v6.1.47-16-gc079d0dd788a

## Test Regressions (compared to v6.1.46)
* bcm2711-rpi-4-b, ltp-syscalls
  - chown02
  - fchown02

* bcm2711-rpi-4-b-64k_page_size, ltp-syscalls
  - chown02
  - fchown02

* bcm2711-rpi-4-b-clang, ltp-syscalls
  - chown02
  - fchown02




Do we need the following patch into stable-rc linux-6.1.y ?

I see from mailing thread discussion, says that

the above commit is backported to LTS kernels -- 5.10.y,5.15.y and 6.1.y.


----

nfsd: use vfs setgid helper
commit 2d8ae8c417db284f598dffb178cc01e7db0f1821 upstream.

We've aligned setgid behavior over multiple kernel releases. The details
can be found in commit cf619f891971 ("Merge tag 'fs.ovl.setgid.v6.2' of
git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/vfs/idmapping") and
commit 426b4ca2d6a5 ("Merge tag 'fs.setgid.v6.0' of
git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/brauner/linux").
Consistent setgid stripping behavior is now encapsulated in the
setattr_should_drop_sgid() helper which is used by all filesystems that
strip setgid bits outside of vfs proper. Usually ATTR_KILL_SGID is
raised in e.g., chown_common() and is subject to the
setattr_should_drop_sgid() check to determine whether the setgid bit can
be retained. Since nfsd is raising ATTR_KILL_SGID unconditionally it
will cause notify_change() to strip it even if the caller had the
necessary privileges to retain it. Ensure that nfsd only raises
ATR_KILL_SGID if the caller lacks the necessary privileges to retain the
setgid bit.

Without this patch the setgid stripping tests in LTP will fail:

> As you can see, the problem is S_ISGID (0002000) was dropped on a
> non-group-executable file while chown was invoked by super-user, while

[...]

> fchown02.c:66: TFAIL: testfile2: wrong mode permissions 0100700, expected 0102700

[...]

> chown02.c:57: TFAIL: testfile2: wrong mode permissions 0100700, expected 0102700

With this patch all tests pass.

Reported-by: Sherry Yang <sherry.yang@oracle.com>
Signed-off-by: Christian Brauner <brauner@kernel.org>
Reviewed-by: Jeff Layton <jlayton@kernel.org>
Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Chuck Lever <chuck.lever@oracle.com>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>


[1] https://lore.kernel.org/linux-nfs/20230502-agenda-regeln-04d2573bd0fd@brauner/
[2] https://lore.kernel.org/all/202210091600.dbe52cbf-yujie.liu@intel.com/
--
Linaro LKFT
https://lkft.linaro.org

Re: [PATCH 6.1 00/15] 6.1.48-rc1 review

[Harshit Mogalapalli]

Hi,

On 25/08/23 12:35 pm, Naresh Kamboju wrote:
> + linux-nfs and more
> 
> On Thu, 24 Aug 2023 at 19:45, Greg Kroah-Hartman
> <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
>>
>> This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 6.1.48 release.
>> There are 15 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 Sat, 26 Aug 2023 14:14:28 +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-6.1.48-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
> 
> 
> Following test regression found on stable-rc 6.1.
> Rpi4 is using NFS mount rootfs and running LTP syscalls testing.
> chown02 tests creating testfile2 on NFS mounted and validating
> the functionality and found that it was a failure.
> 
> This is already been reported by others on lore and fix patch merged
> into stable-rc linux-6.4.y [1] and [2].
> 
> Reported-by: Linux Kernel Functional Testing <lkft@linaro.org>
> 
> Test log:
> --------
> chown02.c:46: TPASS: chown(testfile1, 0, 0) passed
> chown02.c:46: TPASS: chown(testfile2, 0, 0) passed
> chown02.c:58: TFAIL: testfile2: wrong mode permissions 0100700, expected 0102700
> 
> fchown02.c:57: TPASS: fchown(3, 0, 0) passed
> fchown02.c:57: TPASS: fchown(4, 0, 0) passed
> fchown02.c:67: TFAIL: testfile2: wrong mode permissions 0100700,
> expected 0102700
> 

Note:
These both test cases are failing in 5.15.128 as well.

> 
> ## Build
> * kernel: 6.1.48-rc1
> * git: https://gitlab.com/Linaro/lkft/mirrors/stable/linux-stable-rc
> * git branch: linux-6.1.y
> * git commit: c079d0dd788ad4fe887ee6349fe89d23d72f7696
> * git describe: v6.1.47-16-gc079d0dd788a
> * test details:
> https://qa-reports.linaro.org/lkft/linux-stable-rc-linux-6.1.y/build/v6.1.47-16-gc079d0dd788a
> 
> ## Test Regressions (compared to v6.1.46)
> * bcm2711-rpi-4-b, ltp-syscalls
>    - chown02
>    - fchown02
> 
> * bcm2711-rpi-4-b-64k_page_size, ltp-syscalls
>    - chown02
>    - fchown02
> 
> * bcm2711-rpi-4-b-clang, ltp-syscalls
>    - chown02
>    - fchown02
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Do we need the following patch into stable-rc linux-6.1.y ?
> 
> I see from mailing thread discussion, says that
> 
> the above commit is backported to LTS kernels -- 5.10.y,5.15.y and 6.1.y.
> 
> 
> ----
> 
> nfsd: use vfs setgid helper
> commit 2d8ae8c417db284f598dffb178cc01e7db0f1821 upstream.
> 
> We've aligned setgid behavior over multiple kernel releases. The details
> can be found in commit cf619f891971 ("Merge tag 'fs.ovl.setgid.v6.2' of
> git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/vfs/idmapping") and
> commit 426b4ca2d6a5 ("Merge tag 'fs.setgid.v6.0' of
> git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/brauner/linux").
> Consistent setgid stripping behavior is now encapsulated in the
> setattr_should_drop_sgid() helper which is used by all filesystems that
> strip setgid bits outside of vfs proper. Usually ATTR_KILL_SGID is
> raised in e.g., chown_common() and is subject to the
> setattr_should_drop_sgid() check to determine whether the setgid bit can
> be retained. Since nfsd is raising ATTR_KILL_SGID unconditionally it
> will cause notify_change() to strip it even if the caller had the
> necessary privileges to retain it. Ensure that nfsd only raises
> ATR_KILL_SGID if the caller lacks the necessary privileges to retain the
> setgid bit.
> 
> Without this patch the setgid stripping tests in LTP will fail:
> 
>> As you can see, the problem is S_ISGID (0002000) was dropped on a
>> non-group-executable file while chown was invoked by super-user, while
> 
> [...]
> 
>> fchown02.c:66: TFAIL: testfile2: wrong mode permissions 0100700, expected 0102700
> 
> [...]
> 
>> chown02.c:57: TFAIL: testfile2: wrong mode permissions 0100700, expected 0102700
> 
> With this patch all tests pass.
> 
> Reported-by: Sherry Yang <sherry.yang@oracle.com>
> Signed-off-by: Christian Brauner <brauner@kernel.org>
> Reviewed-by: Jeff Layton <jlayton@kernel.org>
> Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org>
> Signed-off-by: Chuck Lever <chuck.lever@oracle.com>
> Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
> 
> 
> [1] https://lore.kernel.org/linux-nfs/20230502-agenda-regeln-04d2573bd0fd@brauner/
> [2] https://lore.kernel.org/all/202210091600.dbe52cbf-yujie.liu@intel.com/
> --
> Linaro LKFT
> https://lkft.linaro.org

Re: [PATCH 6.1 00/15] 6.1.48-rc1 review

[Christian Brauner]

On Fri, Aug 25, 2023 at 12:35:46PM +0530, Naresh Kamboju wrote:
> + linux-nfs and more
> 
> On Thu, 24 Aug 2023 at 19:45, Greg Kroah-Hartman
> <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> >
> > This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 6.1.48 release.
> > There are 15 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 Sat, 26 Aug 2023 14:14:28 +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-6.1.48-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
> 
> 
> Following test regression found on stable-rc 6.1.
> Rpi4 is using NFS mount rootfs and running LTP syscalls testing.
> chown02 tests creating testfile2 on NFS mounted and validating
> the functionality and found that it was a failure.
> 
> This is already been reported by others on lore and fix patch merged
> into stable-rc linux-6.4.y [1] and [2].
> 
> Reported-by: Linux Kernel Functional Testing <lkft@linaro.org>
> 
> Test log:
> --------
> chown02.c:46: TPASS: chown(testfile1, 0, 0) passed
> chown02.c:46: TPASS: chown(testfile2, 0, 0) passed
> chown02.c:58: TFAIL: testfile2: wrong mode permissions 0100700, expected 0102700
> 
> fchown02.c:57: TPASS: fchown(3, 0, 0) passed
> fchown02.c:57: TPASS: fchown(4, 0, 0) passed
> fchown02.c:67: TFAIL: testfile2: wrong mode permissions 0100700,
> expected 0102700
> 
> 
> ## Build
> * kernel: 6.1.48-rc1
> * git: https://gitlab.com/Linaro/lkft/mirrors/stable/linux-stable-rc
> * git branch: linux-6.1.y
> * git commit: c079d0dd788ad4fe887ee6349fe89d23d72f7696
> * git describe: v6.1.47-16-gc079d0dd788a
> * test details:
> https://qa-reports.linaro.org/lkft/linux-stable-rc-linux-6.1.y/build/v6.1.47-16-gc079d0dd788a
> 
> ## Test Regressions (compared to v6.1.46)
> * bcm2711-rpi-4-b, ltp-syscalls
>   - chown02
>   - fchown02
> 
> * bcm2711-rpi-4-b-64k_page_size, ltp-syscalls
>   - chown02
>   - fchown02
> 
> * bcm2711-rpi-4-b-clang, ltp-syscalls
>   - chown02
>   - fchown02
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Do we need the following patch into stable-rc linux-6.1.y ?
> 
> I see from mailing thread discussion, says that
> 
> the above commit is backported to LTS kernels -- 5.10.y,5.15.y and 6.1.y.

s/above/below/?

All setgid related infrastructure and fixes have been backported to all
LTSes. This one is needed for nfsd so yes, it should also be backported.

> 
> 
> ----
> 
> nfsd: use vfs setgid helper
> commit 2d8ae8c417db284f598dffb178cc01e7db0f1821 upstream.
> 
> We've aligned setgid behavior over multiple kernel releases. The details
> can be found in commit cf619f891971 ("Merge tag 'fs.ovl.setgid.v6.2' of
> git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/vfs/idmapping") and
> commit 426b4ca2d6a5 ("Merge tag 'fs.setgid.v6.0' of
> git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/brauner/linux").
> Consistent setgid stripping behavior is now encapsulated in the
> setattr_should_drop_sgid() helper which is used by all filesystems that
> strip setgid bits outside of vfs proper. Usually ATTR_KILL_SGID is
> raised in e.g., chown_common() and is subject to the
> setattr_should_drop_sgid() check to determine whether the setgid bit can
> be retained. Since nfsd is raising ATTR_KILL_SGID unconditionally it
> will cause notify_change() to strip it even if the caller had the
> necessary privileges to retain it. Ensure that nfsd only raises
> ATR_KILL_SGID if the caller lacks the necessary privileges to retain the
> setgid bit.
> 
> Without this patch the setgid stripping tests in LTP will fail:
> 
> > As you can see, the problem is S_ISGID (0002000) was dropped on a
> > non-group-executable file while chown was invoked by super-user, while
> 
> [...]
> 
> > fchown02.c:66: TFAIL: testfile2: wrong mode permissions 0100700, expected 0102700
> 
> [...]
> 
> > chown02.c:57: TFAIL: testfile2: wrong mode permissions 0100700, expected 0102700
> 
> With this patch all tests pass.
> 
> Reported-by: Sherry Yang <sherry.yang@oracle.com>
> Signed-off-by: Christian Brauner <brauner@kernel.org>
> Reviewed-by: Jeff Layton <jlayton@kernel.org>
> Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org>
> Signed-off-by: Chuck Lever <chuck.lever@oracle.com>
> Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
> 
> 
> [1] https://lore.kernel.org/linux-nfs/20230502-agenda-regeln-04d2573bd0fd@brauner/
> [2] https://lore.kernel.org/all/202210091600.dbe52cbf-yujie.liu@intel.com/
> --
> Linaro LKFT
> https://lkft.linaro.org

Re: [PATCH 6.1 00/15] 6.1.48-rc1 review

[Greg Kroah-Hartman]

On Fri, Aug 25, 2023 at 12:35:46PM +0530, Naresh Kamboju wrote:
> + linux-nfs and more
> 
> On Thu, 24 Aug 2023 at 19:45, Greg Kroah-Hartman
> <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> >
> > This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 6.1.48 release.
> > There are 15 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 Sat, 26 Aug 2023 14:14:28 +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-6.1.48-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
> 
> 
> Following test regression found on stable-rc 6.1.
> Rpi4 is using NFS mount rootfs and running LTP syscalls testing.
> chown02 tests creating testfile2 on NFS mounted and validating
> the functionality and found that it was a failure.
> 
> This is already been reported by others on lore and fix patch merged
> into stable-rc linux-6.4.y [1] and [2].
> 
> Reported-by: Linux Kernel Functional Testing <lkft@linaro.org>

Odd, it's not a regression in this -rc cycle, so it was missed in the
previous ones somehow?

> Test log:
> --------
> chown02.c:46: TPASS: chown(testfile1, 0, 0) passed
> chown02.c:46: TPASS: chown(testfile2, 0, 0) passed
> chown02.c:58: TFAIL: testfile2: wrong mode permissions 0100700, expected 0102700
> 
> fchown02.c:57: TPASS: fchown(3, 0, 0) passed
> fchown02.c:57: TPASS: fchown(4, 0, 0) passed
> fchown02.c:67: TFAIL: testfile2: wrong mode permissions 0100700,
> expected 0102700
> 
> 
> ## Build
> * kernel: 6.1.48-rc1
> * git: https://gitlab.com/Linaro/lkft/mirrors/stable/linux-stable-rc
> * git branch: linux-6.1.y
> * git commit: c079d0dd788ad4fe887ee6349fe89d23d72f7696
> * git describe: v6.1.47-16-gc079d0dd788a
> * test details:
> https://qa-reports.linaro.org/lkft/linux-stable-rc-linux-6.1.y/build/v6.1.47-16-gc079d0dd788a
> 
> ## Test Regressions (compared to v6.1.46)
> * bcm2711-rpi-4-b, ltp-syscalls
>   - chown02
>   - fchown02
> 
> * bcm2711-rpi-4-b-64k_page_size, ltp-syscalls
>   - chown02
>   - fchown02
> 
> * bcm2711-rpi-4-b-clang, ltp-syscalls
>   - chown02
>   - fchown02
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Do we need the following patch into stable-rc linux-6.1.y ?
> 
> I see from mailing thread discussion, says that
> 
> the above commit is backported to LTS kernels -- 5.10.y,5.15.y and 6.1.y.

What "above commit"?

And what commit should be backported?

confused,

greg k-h

Re: [PATCH 6.1 00/15] 6.1.48-rc1 review

[Naresh Kamboju]

On Fri, 25 Aug 2023 at 13:57, Greg Kroah-Hartman
<gregkh@linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Aug 25, 2023 at 12:35:46PM +0530, Naresh Kamboju wrote:
> > + linux-nfs and more
> >
> > On Thu, 24 Aug 2023 at 19:45, Greg Kroah-Hartman
> > <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 6.1.48 release.
> > > There are 15 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 Sat, 26 Aug 2023 14:14:28 +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-6.1.48-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
> >
> >
> > Following test regression found on stable-rc 6.1.
> > Rpi4 is using NFS mount rootfs and running LTP syscalls testing.
> > chown02 tests creating testfile2 on NFS mounted and validating
> > the functionality and found that it was a failure.
> >
> > This is already been reported by others on lore and fix patch merged
> > into stable-rc linux-6.4.y [1] and [2].
> >
> > Reported-by: Linux Kernel Functional Testing <lkft@linaro.org>
>
> Odd, it's not a regression in this -rc cycle, so it was missed in the
> previous ones somehow?
>
> > Test log:
> > --------
> > chown02.c:46: TPASS: chown(testfile1, 0, 0) passed
> > chown02.c:46: TPASS: chown(testfile2, 0, 0) passed
> > chown02.c:58: TFAIL: testfile2: wrong mode permissions 0100700, expected 0102700
> >
> > fchown02.c:57: TPASS: fchown(3, 0, 0) passed
> > fchown02.c:57: TPASS: fchown(4, 0, 0) passed
> > fchown02.c:67: TFAIL: testfile2: wrong mode permissions 0100700,
> > expected 0102700
> >
> >
> > ## Build
> > * kernel: 6.1.48-rc1
> > * git: https://gitlab.com/Linaro/lkft/mirrors/stable/linux-stable-rc
> > * git branch: linux-6.1.y
> > * git commit: c079d0dd788ad4fe887ee6349fe89d23d72f7696
> > * git describe: v6.1.47-16-gc079d0dd788a
> > * test details:
> > https://qa-reports.linaro.org/lkft/linux-stable-rc-linux-6.1.y/build/v6.1.47-16-gc079d0dd788a
> >
> > ## Test Regressions (compared to v6.1.46)
> > * bcm2711-rpi-4-b, ltp-syscalls
> >   - chown02
> >   - fchown02
> >
> > * bcm2711-rpi-4-b-64k_page_size, ltp-syscalls
> >   - chown02
> >   - fchown02
> >
> > * bcm2711-rpi-4-b-clang, ltp-syscalls
> >   - chown02
> >   - fchown02
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Do we need the following patch into stable-rc linux-6.1.y ?
> >
> > I see from mailing thread discussion, says that
> >
> > the above commit is backported to LTS kernels -- 5.10.y,5.15.y and 6.1.y.
>
> What "above commit"?

Sorry, s/above/below/
I copied that from another email thread as it is.

>
> And what commit should be backported?


  nfsd: use vfs setgid helper
    commit 2d8ae8c417db284f598dffb178cc01e7db0f1821 upstream.

Please refer this link,
 - https://lore.kernel.org/linux-nfs/20230502-agenda-regeln-04d2573bd0fd@brauner/


>
> confused,
>
> greg k-h

Re: [PATCH 6.1 00/15] 6.1.48-rc1 review

[Sudip Mukherjee (Codethink)]

Hi Greg,

On Thu, Aug 24, 2023 at 04:14:56PM +0200, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 6.1.48 release.
> There are 15 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 Sat, 26 Aug 2023 14:14:28 +0000.
> Anything received after that time might be too late.

Build test (gcc version 12.3.1 20230625):
mips: 52 configs -> no failure
arm: 100 configs -> no failure
arm64: 3 configs -> no failure
x86_64: 4 configs -> no failure
alpha allmodconfig -> no failure
csky allmodconfig -> no failure
powerpc allmodconfig -> no failure
riscv allmodconfig -> no failure
s390 allmodconfig -> no failure
xtensa allmodconfig -> no failure

Boot test:
x86_64: Booted on my test laptop. Warning on boot.
x86_64: Booted on qemu. Warning on boot. [1]
arm64: Booted on rpi4b (4GB model). No regression. [2]
mips: Booted on ci20 board. No regression. [3]

[1]. https://openqa.qa.codethink.co.uk/tests/4787
[2]. https://openqa.qa.codethink.co.uk/tests/4796
[3]. https://openqa.qa.codethink.co.uk/tests/4795

Tested-by: Sudip Mukherjee <sudip.mukherjee@codethink.co.uk>


[    0.154501] ------------[ cut here ]------------
[    0.154505] missing return thunk: __alt_instructions_end+0x21b2/0x21d0-srso_untrain_ret+0x0/0x2: e9 17 81 f8 fe
[    0.154517] WARNING: CPU: 0 PID: 0 at arch/x86/kernel/alternative.c:572 apply_returns+0x1cb/0x200
[    0.154524] Modules linked in:
[    0.154526] CPU: 0 PID: 0 Comm: swapper/0 Not tainted 6.1.48-rc1-c079d0dd788a+ #1
[    0.154529] Hardware name: LENOVO 4287CTO/4287CTO, BIOS 8DET68WW (1.38 ) 04/11/2013
[    0.154531] RIP: 0010:apply_returns+0x1cb/0x200
[    0.154534] Code: 5b 01 00 0f 85 0b ff ff ff 49 89 e8 b9 05 00 00 00 4c 89 f2 48 89 ee 48 c7 c7 38 16 4f b8 c6 05 f5 d1 5b 01 01 e8 85 8e 05 00 <0f> 0b e9 e3 fe ff ff c7 84 24 81 00 00 00 cc cc cc cc 42 c7 44 38
[    0.154536] RSP: 0000:ffffffffb8803e30 EFLAGS: 00010282
[    0.154539] RAX: 0000000000000000 RBX: ffffffffb906d7b4 RCX: 0000000000000000
[    0.154541] RDX: 0000000000000003 RSI: 0000000000004ffb RDI: 00000000ffffffff
[    0.154542] RBP: ffffffffb9079962 R08: 0000000000000000 R09: 00000000ffffefff
[    0.154544] R10: ffffffffb8803cc0 R11: ffffffffb88cc1e8 R12: ffffffffb906d7d4
[    0.154545] R13: cccccccccccccccc R14: ffffffffb8001a7e R15: 0000000000000004
[    0.154547] FS:  0000000000000000(0000) GS:ffff936dd6200000(0000) knlGS:0000000000000000
[    0.154549] CS:  0010 DS: 0000 ES: 0000 CR0: 0000000080050033
[    0.154551] CR2: ffff936dde5ff000 CR3: 000000013b40a001 CR4: 00000000000606f0
[    0.154553] Call Trace:
[    0.154556]  <TASK>
[    0.154559]  ? __warn+0x79/0xc0
[    0.154565]  ? apply_returns+0x1cb/0x200
[    0.154567]  ? report_bug+0xee/0x170
[    0.154572]  ? prb_read_valid+0x17/0x20
[    0.154578]  ? handle_bug+0x42/0x70
[    0.154581]  ? exc_invalid_op+0x14/0x70
[    0.154583]  ? asm_exc_invalid_op+0x16/0x20
[    0.154586]  ? retbleed_return_thunk+0x7e/0x7e
[    0.154591]  ? apply_returns+0x1cb/0x200
[    0.154594]  ? apply_retpolines+0x1f5/0x2c0
[    0.154598]  alternative_instructions+0x4d/0xfc
[    0.154604]  arch_cpu_finalize_init+0x28/0x47
[    0.154607]  start_kernel+0x66c/0x70e
[    0.154612]  secondary_startup_64_no_verify+0xce/0xdb
[    0.154618]  </TASK>
[    0.154619] ---[ end trace 0000000000000000 ]---



-- 
Regards
Sudip

Re: [PATCH 6.1 00/15] 6.1.48-rc1 review

[Naresh Kamboju]

On Fri, 25 Aug 2023 at 13:57, Greg Kroah-Hartman
<gregkh@linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Aug 25, 2023 at 12:35:46PM +0530, Naresh Kamboju wrote:
> > + linux-nfs and more
> >
> > On Thu, 24 Aug 2023 at 19:45, Greg Kroah-Hartman
> > <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 6.1.48 release.
> > > There are 15 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 Sat, 26 Aug 2023 14:14:28 +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-6.1.48-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
> >
> >
> > Following test regression found on stable-rc 6.1.
> > Rpi4 is using NFS mount rootfs and running LTP syscalls testing.
> > chown02 tests creating testfile2 on NFS mounted and validating
> > the functionality and found that it was a failure.
> >
> > This is already been reported by others on lore and fix patch merged
> > into stable-rc linux-6.4.y [1] and [2].
> >
> > Reported-by: Linux Kernel Functional Testing <lkft@linaro.org>
>
> Odd, it's not a regression in this -rc cycle, so it was missed in the
> previous ones somehow?

I have re-tested with newers and older versions of the kernel and here
I confirm that this is not a regression from this round of stable rc review.

We have made a couple of changes to our infrastructure and are investigating
the root cause of these two test cases failures.

- Naresh

Re: [PATCH 6.1 00/15] 6.1.48-rc1 review

[Naresh Kamboju]

On Thu, 24 Aug 2023 at 19:45, Greg Kroah-Hartman
<gregkh@linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
>
> This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 6.1.48 release.
> There are 15 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 Sat, 26 Aug 2023 14:14:28 +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-6.1.48-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>

NOTE:
1)
LTP syscalls chown02 and fchown02 test failures on NFS mounted filesystem
on arm64 Rpi4 will be investigated further.

2)
While booting x86_64 we have been noticing this kernel warning
but the system is stable and running other test cases.

kernel warning on x86_64,
[    0.809960] missing return thunk:
__alt_instructions_end+0x2743/0x2770-srso_untrain_ret+0x0/0x2: e9 7e
fd 09 ff
[    0.811301] WARNING: CPU: 0 PID: 0 at
arch/x86/kernel/alternative.c:572 apply_returns+0x1d7/0x200
[    0.812587] Modules linked in:
[    0.813651] CPU: 0 PID: 0 Comm: swapper/0 Not tainted 6.1.48-rc1 #1
[    0.814120] Hardware name: QEMU Standard PC (Q35 + ICH9, 2009),
BIOS 1.16.2-debian-1.16.2-1 04/01/2014
[    0.814120] RIP: 0010:apply_returns+0x1d7/0x200


## Build
* kernel: 6.1.48-rc1
* git: https://gitlab.com/Linaro/lkft/mirrors/stable/linux-stable-rc
* git branch: linux-6.1.y
* git commit: c079d0dd788ad4fe887ee6349fe89d23d72f7696
* git describe: v6.1.47-16-gc079d0dd788a
* test details:
https://qa-reports.linaro.org/lkft/linux-stable-rc-linux-6.1.y/build/v6.1.47-16-gc079d0dd788a

## Test Regressions (compared to v6.1.46)

## Metric Regressions (compared to v6.1.46)

## Test Fixes (compared to v6.1.46)

## Metric Fixes (compared to v6.1.46)

## Test result summary
total: 165563, pass: 138512, fail: 5138, skip: 21721, xfail: 192

## Build Summary
* arc: 5 total, 5 passed, 0 failed
* arm: 151 total, 149 passed, 2 failed
* arm64: 56 total, 53 passed, 3 failed
* i386: 41 total, 39 passed, 2 failed
* mips: 30 total, 28 passed, 2 failed
* parisc: 4 total, 4 passed, 0 failed
* powerpc: 38 total, 36 passed, 2 failed
* riscv: 16 total, 13 passed, 3 failed
* s390: 16 total, 14 passed, 2 failed
* sh: 14 total, 12 passed, 2 failed
* sparc: 8 total, 8 passed, 0 failed
* x86_64: 46 total, 44 passed, 2 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-membarrier
* kselftest-memfd
* kselftest-memory-hotplug
* kselftest-mincore
* 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-vm
* kselftest-watchdog
* kselftest-x86
* kselftest-zram
* kunit
* kvm-unit-tests
* libgpiod
* log-parser-boot
* log-parser-test
* ltp-cap_bounds
* ltp-commands
* ltp-containers
* ltp-controllers
* ltp-cpuhotplug
* ltp-crypto
* ltp-cve
* ltp-dio
* ltp-fcntl-locktests
* ltp-filecaps
* ltp-fs
* ltp-fs_bind
* ltp-fs_perms_simple
* ltp-fsx
* ltp-hugetlb
* ltp-io
* ltp-ipc
* ltp-math
* ltp-mm
* ltp-nptl
* ltp-pty
* ltp-sched
* ltp-securebits
* ltp-smoke
* ltp-syscalls
* ltp-tracing
* network-basic-tests
* perf
* rcutorture
* v4l2-compliance

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

Re: [PATCH 6.1 00/15] 6.1.48-rc1 review

[Jon Hunter]

On Thu, 24 Aug 2023 16:14:56 +0200, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 6.1.48 release.
> There are 15 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 Sat, 26 Aug 2023 14:14:28 +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-6.1.48-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:
    11 builds:	11 pass, 0 fail
    28 boots:	28 pass, 0 fail
    125 tests:	125 pass, 0 fail

Linux version:	6.1.48-rc1-gc079d0dd788a
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

Re: [PATCH 6.1 00/15] 6.1.48-rc1 review

[Conor Dooley]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3754 bytes --]

On Thu, Aug 24, 2023 at 04:14:56PM +0200, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 6.1.48 release.
> There are 15 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.

SRSO mitigations are probably not in the slightest bit relevant for me,
but I didn't get a chance to retest the previous stable release after
the build got unbricked for RISC-V, so:
Tested-by: Conor Dooley <conor.dooley@microchip.com>

Fix for the build issue I saw should be on it's way to Linus today, so
I guess the original fix you were backporting & its fix should end up
back in your queue soonTM.

Thanks,
Conor.

> 
> Responses should be made by Sat, 26 Aug 2023 14:14:28 +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-6.1.48-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 6.1.48-rc1
> 
> Borislav Petkov (AMD) <bp@alien8.de>
>     x86/srso: Correct the mitigation status when SMT is disabled
> 
> Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
>     objtool/x86: Fixup frame-pointer vs rethunk
> 
> Petr Pavlu <petr.pavlu@suse.com>
>     x86/retpoline,kprobes: Fix position of thunk sections with CONFIG_LTO_CLANG
> 
> Borislav Petkov (AMD) <bp@alien8.de>
>     x86/srso: Disable the mitigation on unaffected configurations
> 
> Borislav Petkov (AMD) <bp@alien8.de>
>     x86/CPU/AMD: Fix the DIV(0) initial fix attempt
> 
> Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>
>     x86/retpoline: Don't clobber RFLAGS during srso_safe_ret()
> 
> Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
>     x86/static_call: Fix __static_call_fixup()
> 
> Borislav Petkov (AMD) <bp@alien8.de>
>     x86/srso: Explain the untraining sequences a bit more
> 
> Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
>     x86/cpu: Cleanup the untrain mess
> 
> Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
>     x86/cpu: Rename srso_(.*)_alias to srso_alias_\1
> 
> Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
>     x86/cpu: Rename original retbleed methods
> 
> Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
>     x86/cpu: Clean up SRSO return thunk mess
> 
> Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
>     x86/alternative: Make custom return thunk unconditional
> 
> Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
>     x86/cpu: Fix up srso_safe_ret() and __x86_return_thunk()
> 
> Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
>     x86/cpu: Fix __x86_return_thunk symbol type
> 
> 
> -------------
> 
> Diffstat:
> 
>  Documentation/admin-guide/hw-vuln/srso.rst |   4 +-
>  Makefile                                   |   4 +-
>  arch/x86/include/asm/entry-common.h        |   1 +
>  arch/x86/include/asm/nospec-branch.h       |  28 +++---
>  arch/x86/kernel/cpu/amd.c                  |   1 +
>  arch/x86/kernel/cpu/bugs.c                 |  28 +++++-
>  arch/x86/kernel/static_call.c              |  13 +++
>  arch/x86/kernel/traps.c                    |   2 -
>  arch/x86/kernel/vmlinux.lds.S              |  20 ++--
>  arch/x86/kvm/svm/svm.c                     |   2 +
>  arch/x86/lib/retpoline.S                   | 141 ++++++++++++++++++++---------
>  tools/objtool/arch/x86/decode.c            |   2 +-
>  tools/objtool/check.c                      |  21 +++--
>  13 files changed, 182 insertions(+), 85 deletions(-)
> 
> 

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 228 bytes --]

Re: [PATCH 6.1 00/15] 6.1.48-rc1 review

[Takeshi Ogasawara]

Hi Greg

On Thu, Aug 24, 2023 at 11:16 PM Greg Kroah-Hartman
<gregkh@linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
>
> This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 6.1.48 release.
> There are 15 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 Sat, 26 Aug 2023 14:14:28 +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-6.1.48-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

6.1.48-rc1 tested.

Build successfully completed.
Boot successfully completed.
No dmesg regressions.
Video output normal.
Sound output normal.

Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Carbon Gen10(Intel i7-1260P(x86_64) arch linux)

Thanks

Tested-by: Takeshi Ogasawara <takeshi.ogasawara@futuring-girl.com>

Re: [PATCH 6.1 00/15] 6.1.48-rc1 review

[Guenter Roeck]

On Thu, Aug 24, 2023 at 04:14:56PM +0200, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 6.1.48 release.
> There are 15 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 Sat, 26 Aug 2023 14:14:28 +0000.
> Anything received after that time might be too late.
> 

Build results:
	total: 157 pass: 156 fail: 1
Failed builds:
	m68k:sun3_defconfig
Qemu test results:
	total: 521 pass: 519 fail: 2
Failed tests:
	arm:fuji-bmc:aspeed_g5_defconfig:notests:mem1G:mtd128,0,8,1:net,nic:aspeed-bmc-facebook-fuji:f2fs
	arm:bletchley-bmc,fmc-model=mt25qu02g,spi-model=mt25qu02g:aspeed_g5_defconfig:notests:mem1G:mtd256:net,nic:aspeed-bmc-facebook-bletchley:f2fs

The usual f2fs crashes, and m68k:sun3_defconfig still fails
to build with "Inconsistent kallsyms data".

Guenter

Re: [PATCH 6.1 00/15] 6.1.48-rc1 review

[Harshit Mogalapalli]

Hi

On 25/08/23 2:18 pm, Naresh Kamboju wrote:
> On Fri, 25 Aug 2023 at 13:57, Greg Kroah-Hartman
> <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
>>
>> On Fri, Aug 25, 2023 at 12:35:46PM +0530, Naresh Kamboju wrote:
>>> + linux-nfs and more
>>>
>>> On Thu, 24 Aug 2023 at 19:45, Greg Kroah-Hartman
>>> <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 6.1.48 release.
>>>> There are 15 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 Sat, 26 Aug 2023 14:14:28 +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-6.1.48-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
>>>
>>>
>>> Following test regression found on stable-rc 6.1.
>>> Rpi4 is using NFS mount rootfs and running LTP syscalls testing.
>>> chown02 tests creating testfile2 on NFS mounted and validating
>>> the functionality and found that it was a failure.
>>>
>>> This is already been reported by others on lore and fix patch merged
>>> into stable-rc linux-6.4.y [1] and [2].
>>>
>>> Reported-by: Linux Kernel Functional Testing <lkft@linaro.org>
>>
>> Odd, it's not a regression in this -rc cycle, so it was missed in the
>> previous ones somehow?
>>
>>> Test log:
>>> --------
>>> chown02.c:46: TPASS: chown(testfile1, 0, 0) passed
>>> chown02.c:46: TPASS: chown(testfile2, 0, 0) passed
>>> chown02.c:58: TFAIL: testfile2: wrong mode permissions 0100700, expected 0102700
>>>
>>> fchown02.c:57: TPASS: fchown(3, 0, 0) passed
>>> fchown02.c:57: TPASS: fchown(4, 0, 0) passed
>>> fchown02.c:67: TFAIL: testfile2: wrong mode permissions 0100700,
>>> expected 0102700
>>>
>>>
>>> ## Build
>>> * kernel: 6.1.48-rc1
>>> * git: https://gitlab.com/Linaro/lkft/mirrors/stable/linux-stable-rc
>>> * git branch: linux-6.1.y
>>> * git commit: c079d0dd788ad4fe887ee6349fe89d23d72f7696
>>> * git describe: v6.1.47-16-gc079d0dd788a
>>> * test details:
>>> https://qa-reports.linaro.org/lkft/linux-stable-rc-linux-6.1.y/build/v6.1.47-16-gc079d0dd788a
>>>
>>> ## Test Regressions (compared to v6.1.46)
>>> * bcm2711-rpi-4-b, ltp-syscalls
>>>    - chown02
>>>    - fchown02
>>>
>>> * bcm2711-rpi-4-b-64k_page_size, ltp-syscalls
>>>    - chown02
>>>    - fchown02
>>>
>>> * bcm2711-rpi-4-b-clang, ltp-syscalls
>>>    - chown02
>>>    - fchown02
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Do we need the following patch into stable-rc linux-6.1.y ?
>>>
>>> I see from mailing thread discussion, says that
>>>
>>> the above commit is backported to LTS kernels -- 5.10.y,5.15.y and 6.1.y.
>>
>> What "above commit"?
> 
> Sorry, s/above/below/
> I copied that from another email thread as it is.
> 
>>
>> And what commit should be backported?
> 
> 
>    nfsd: use vfs setgid helper
>      commit 2d8ae8c417db284f598dffb178cc01e7db0f1821 upstream.
> 

I have tried backporting this on 6.1.y and 5.15.y.

Here are the backports. (note: I would like to have them reviewed)

6.1.y: 
https://lore.kernel.org/all/20230825161603.371792-1-harshit.m.mogalapalli@oracle.com/

5.15.y: 
https://lore.kernel.org/all/20230825161901.371818-1-harshit.m.mogalapalli@oracle.com/


Thanks,
Harshit
> Please refer this link,
>   - https://lore.kernel.org/linux-nfs/20230502-agenda-regeln-04d2573bd0fd@brauner/
> 
> 
>>
>> confused,
>>
>> greg k-h

Re: [PATCH 6.1 00/15] 6.1.48-rc1 review

[Shuah Khan]

On 8/24/23 08:14, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 6.1.48 release.
> There are 15 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 Sat, 26 Aug 2023 14:14:28 +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-6.1.48-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

Re: [PATCH 6.1 00/15] 6.1.48-rc1 review

[Bagas Sanjaya]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 558 bytes --]

On Thu, Aug 24, 2023 at 04:14:56PM +0200, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 6.1.48 release.
> There are 15 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.
> 

Successfully compiled and installed bindeb-pkgs on my computer (Acer
Aspire E15, Intel Core i3 Haswell). No noticeable regressions.

Tested-by: Bagas Sanjaya <bagasdotme@gmail.com>

-- 
An old man doll... just what I always wanted! - Clara

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 228 bytes --]

Re: [PATCH 6.1 00/15] 6.1.48-rc1 review

[Salvatore Bonaccorso]

Hi
On Fri, Aug 25, 2023 at 10:26:59AM +0100, Sudip Mukherjee (Codethink) wrote:
> Hi Greg,
> 
> On Thu, Aug 24, 2023 at 04:14:56PM +0200, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> > This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 6.1.48 release.
> > There are 15 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 Sat, 26 Aug 2023 14:14:28 +0000.
> > Anything received after that time might be too late.
> 
> Build test (gcc version 12.3.1 20230625):
> mips: 52 configs -> no failure
> arm: 100 configs -> no failure
> arm64: 3 configs -> no failure
> x86_64: 4 configs -> no failure
> alpha allmodconfig -> no failure
> csky allmodconfig -> no failure
> powerpc allmodconfig -> no failure
> riscv allmodconfig -> no failure
> s390 allmodconfig -> no failure
> xtensa allmodconfig -> no failure
> 
> Boot test:
> x86_64: Booted on my test laptop. Warning on boot.
> x86_64: Booted on qemu. Warning on boot. [1]
> arm64: Booted on rpi4b (4GB model). No regression. [2]
> mips: Booted on ci20 board. No regression. [3]
> 
> [1]. https://openqa.qa.codethink.co.uk/tests/4787
> [2]. https://openqa.qa.codethink.co.uk/tests/4796
> [3]. https://openqa.qa.codethink.co.uk/tests/4795
> 
> Tested-by: Sudip Mukherjee <sudip.mukherjee@codethink.co.uk>
> 
> 
> [    0.154501] ------------[ cut here ]------------
> [    0.154505] missing return thunk: __alt_instructions_end+0x21b2/0x21d0-srso_untrain_ret+0x0/0x2: e9 17 81 f8 fe
> [    0.154517] WARNING: CPU: 0 PID: 0 at arch/x86/kernel/alternative.c:572 apply_returns+0x1cb/0x200
> [    0.154524] Modules linked in:
> [    0.154526] CPU: 0 PID: 0 Comm: swapper/0 Not tainted 6.1.48-rc1-c079d0dd788a+ #1
> [    0.154529] Hardware name: LENOVO 4287CTO/4287CTO, BIOS 8DET68WW (1.38 ) 04/11/2013
> [    0.154531] RIP: 0010:apply_returns+0x1cb/0x200
> [    0.154534] Code: 5b 01 00 0f 85 0b ff ff ff 49 89 e8 b9 05 00 00 00 4c 89 f2 48 89 ee 48 c7 c7 38 16 4f b8 c6 05 f5 d1 5b 01 01 e8 85 8e 05 00 <0f> 0b e9 e3 fe ff ff c7 84 24 81 00 00 00 cc cc cc cc 42 c7 44 38
> [    0.154536] RSP: 0000:ffffffffb8803e30 EFLAGS: 00010282
> [    0.154539] RAX: 0000000000000000 RBX: ffffffffb906d7b4 RCX: 0000000000000000
> [    0.154541] RDX: 0000000000000003 RSI: 0000000000004ffb RDI: 00000000ffffffff
> [    0.154542] RBP: ffffffffb9079962 R08: 0000000000000000 R09: 00000000ffffefff
> [    0.154544] R10: ffffffffb8803cc0 R11: ffffffffb88cc1e8 R12: ffffffffb906d7d4
> [    0.154545] R13: cccccccccccccccc R14: ffffffffb8001a7e R15: 0000000000000004
> [    0.154547] FS:  0000000000000000(0000) GS:ffff936dd6200000(0000) knlGS:0000000000000000
> [    0.154549] CS:  0010 DS: 0000 ES: 0000 CR0: 0000000080050033
> [    0.154551] CR2: ffff936dde5ff000 CR3: 000000013b40a001 CR4: 00000000000606f0
> [    0.154553] Call Trace:
> [    0.154556]  <TASK>
> [    0.154559]  ? __warn+0x79/0xc0
> [    0.154565]  ? apply_returns+0x1cb/0x200
> [    0.154567]  ? report_bug+0xee/0x170
> [    0.154572]  ? prb_read_valid+0x17/0x20
> [    0.154578]  ? handle_bug+0x42/0x70
> [    0.154581]  ? exc_invalid_op+0x14/0x70
> [    0.154583]  ? asm_exc_invalid_op+0x16/0x20
> [    0.154586]  ? retbleed_return_thunk+0x7e/0x7e
> [    0.154591]  ? apply_returns+0x1cb/0x200
> [    0.154594]  ? apply_retpolines+0x1f5/0x2c0
> [    0.154598]  alternative_instructions+0x4d/0xfc
> [    0.154604]  arch_cpu_finalize_init+0x28/0x47
> [    0.154607]  start_kernel+0x66c/0x70e
> [    0.154612]  secondary_startup_64_no_verify+0xce/0xdb
> [    0.154618]  </TASK>
> [    0.154619] ---[ end trace 0000000000000000 ]---

Seeing this as well, but see some context in the thread in the
previous cycle (where then those patches were not included);

https://lore.kernel.org/stable/2023082212-pregnant-lizard-80e0@gregkh/

Apart for the above regression, no other regressions spotted. 

Tested-by: Salvatore Bonaccorso <carnil@debian.org> 

Regards,
Salvatore