From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-alma10-1.taild15c8.ts.net [100.103.45.18]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2A20A3F823E; Mon, 27 Jul 2026 12:34:16 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=100.103.45.18 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1785155658; cv=none; b=nbM9wc47erQfYFdnN7mmVcaU93PLQ6E04pi1mEDWxovz8Ed11rDhtDLFJO8SiYzXPSYduCeiO37KPAnU4uATnckEs7RpmXchfvRs5YNw1704KD2AWrg/a9q4jMUwopLL75ZZwR1dMKER/EQh/F8uyEhK07CzhYj7Bt0oOqcD7uM= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1785155658; c=relaxed/simple; bh=4NKP5XOkpu4oTqud1t4vQGtZRZHlVZt3idNsSSDyLPY=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=oQ263Mcf8iK+MU/q9sMKfk9iVAP0BN7z7/1gc3JkfZQCq5bU94k+4Whs8ww6/D6FLx7f7dUW26QbahwVCJCNGdFjzZkP6UBoUj5mtfZ7PFkYIN/lbiOSbGM5IMFIYQlyOy9kBNhgjaMDvmc4i6rUnRNPYl3/BEQDu0qxkh0ArlY= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=lilrqU46; arc=none smtp.client-ip=100.103.45.18 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="lilrqU46" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 828DC1F000E9; Mon, 27 Jul 2026 12:34:16 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=kernel.org; s=k20260515; t=1785155656; bh=8driKVCnf8Kbn7RW89LGQxINbySI0/fMRE1fgoul8Sg=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To; b=lilrqU46OYgcQV3ZKKs8z9siC1SwiwjTbzgfw7lud/ZgpAMkNIsJ6qRzcThBLL6P/ cOPfpp9TI0KyUqIQr5DCBEgwd+VWYmLxSiAMMM3L9hkrjLsdhhM1PlYKUuOu4LhncP mlOgK6M39Hpn4FRvmVEN161wT1mgY7pzl8XBPVBscOMIT+EDLcDoOALxnaA4ca3K+W n3DhiogNNqqrHWF5M01/VN65kfdLcE573Io1Y9job4myx2jQv0qZ7ie1+U2PM+sWUN vlrIpwHyxCoKMiSiOFBluuUVD/6DSh0OGDNOSu4SUVGNromcVOjkzAEpJhfLYdvzG5 LmKgwJ/Z8blkw== Date: Mon, 27 Jul 2026 08:34:15 -0400 From: Sasha Levin To: Thorsten Leemhuis Cc: Greg KH , "Alex L." , "stable@vger.kernel.org" , Linux kernel regressions list Subject: Re: Backport patch that wasn't dropped, but not applied in the actual stable release Message-ID: References: <6dc6ac56-3126-4266-9e43-ec67a3203b34@leemhuis.info> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: regressions@lists.linux.dev List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <6dc6ac56-3126-4266-9e43-ec67a3203b34@leemhuis.info> On Mon, Jul 27, 2026 at 10:14:26AM +0200, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: >On 7/21/26 20:51, Alex L. wrote: >> Hello, I'm writing with regards to drm-amd-display-fix-ism-dc_lock- >> deadlock-during-susp.patch that can be found in the stable-queue >> repo, under releases/7.1.3/ on the master branch. (https:// >> git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/stable/stable-queue.git/tree/ >> releases/7.1.3/drm-amd-display-fix-ism-dc_lock-deadlock-during- >> susp.patch) >> >> Despite being under the releases directory to this date, this patch >> wasn't actually applied in the 7.1.3 release upon inspection of the >> stable tree. It also wasn't included in the release announcement for >> 7.1.3 nor the diffstat within. It wasn't even included in the RC's >> for 7.1.3. I have searched the stable mailing list and the stable- >> queue repo's commit histories to establish whether the patch was >> dropped later for some reason - to my knowledge, this doesn't appear >> to be the case. >> >> On further investigation I found that the commit that first >> introduced this patch to stable-queue's queue-7.1/ added the patch >> file to the directory, but did not add it to the queue-7.1/series >> file. (https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/stable/stable- >> queue.git/commit/?id=76522806dbfb58941f6fa4b6116b891b66689613) >> >> Could this be an accidental omission of the patch due to it not >> being on the series file, or was there some other reason that the >> patch was not included? As a user who's affected by the regression >> that the patch addresses, I would very much appreciate it being >> included in future 7.1.y releases. >Greg, Sasha, from a quick look this analysis seems correct. Did some >script do something odd? Or did Alex and I miss something: > >Reminder, it was Sasha that queued the patch for 7.1: >https://lore.kernel.org/all/stable-reply-item001-amd-ism-71-20260628203053@kernel.org/ > >Sashiko shortly afterwards (see thread) complained about two things, but >those were pre-existing issues (without any fixes in mainline, at least >I did not spon any references for it). You're right - thanks for the report. I'll queue it up again. -- Thanks, Sasha