lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Sat, 3 Feb 2018 06:18:24 +0100 From: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org> To: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, ben.hutchings@...ethink.co.uk, shuahkh@....samsung.com, lkft-triage@...ts.linaro.org, patches@...nelci.org, stable@...r.kernel.org, akpm@...ux-foundation.org, torvalds@...ux-foundation.org, linux@...ck-us.net Subject: Re: [PATCH 4.15 00/55] 4.15.1-stable review On Fri, Feb 02, 2018 at 10:35:19PM -0600, Dan Rue wrote: > On Fri, Feb 02, 2018 at 05:58:18PM +0100, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > > This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 4.15.1 release. > > There are 55 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 Sun Feb 4 14:07:50 UTC 2018. > > Anything received after that time might be too late. > > > > The whole patch series can be found in one patch at: > > kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/v4.x/stable-review/patch-4.15.1-rc1.gz > > or in the git tree and branch at: > > git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/stable/linux-stable-rc.git linux-4.15.y > > and the diffstat can be found below. > > Results from Linaro’s test farm. > > No regressions since 4.15 release, but you'll notice high failure counts > in kselftest. These are because it was the first RC and I ran the tests > multiple times - first without a skipfile, and then again with a partial > skipfile. All of the failures look like known issues that we also saw on > 4.15 release. Why does kselftest need a "skip list"? Shouldn't all of the tests that ship in the kernel tree, pass on that release? Is anyone looking into the failures? That seems like a pretty obvious thing :( And was anyone testing the -rc releases to catch this before 4.15 came out? If not, why not? I thought you all were testing rc releases now... Anyway, thanks for the reports. thanks, greg k-h
Powered by blists - more mailing lists