linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 4.9 00/96] 4.9.163-stable review

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

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Wed, 13 Mar 2019 15:06:33 -0700
From:   Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>
To:     Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, torvalds@...ux-foundation.org,
        akpm@...ux-foundation.org, shuah@...nel.org, patches@...nelci.org,
        ben.hutchings@...ethink.co.uk, lkft-triage@...ts.linaro.org,
        stable@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4.9 00/96] 4.9.163-stable review

On Wed, Mar 13, 2019 at 01:49:49PM -0700, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 13, 2019 at 01:34:41PM -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> > On Tue, Mar 12, 2019 at 10:09:18AM -0700, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> > > This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 4.9.163 release.
> > > There are 96 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 Thu Mar 14 17:10:06 UTC 2019.
> > > Anything received after that time might be too late.
> > > 
> > 
> > Build results:
> > 	total: 172 pass: 170 fail: 2
> > Failed builds: 
> > 	i386:tools/perf 
> > 	x86_64:tools/perf 
> > Qemu test results:
> > 	total: 316 pass: 316 fail: 0
> > 
> > Culprit is commit 386ca5754fad ("perf trace: Support multiple "vfs_getname"
> > probes"), which introduces a call to strstarts() but not the necessary
> > include file or declaration. Unfortunately, fixing that is quite complex
> > (commit 8e99b6d4533c ("tools include: Adopt strstarts() from the kernel")
> > doesn't apply).
> 
> Thanks for tracking this down, I'm lost in a maze of gcc8 issues with
> perf on 4.9 and 4.4 at the moment trying to fix that.
> 
> I'll go drop this patch from the 4.9 and 4.4 queues.
> 
Agreed; the same patch also introduces a call to evlist__for_each_entry_safe(),
which does not exist in v4.4.y.

Guenter