linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 4.14 00/81] 4.14.126-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] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20190613163827.GJ1513@sasha-vm>
Date:   Thu, 13 Jun 2019 12:38:27 -0400
From:   Sasha Levin <sashal@...nel.org>
To:     Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
Cc:     Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>, 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 4.14 00/81] 4.14.126-stable review

On Thu, Jun 13, 2019 at 05:37:44PM +0200, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
>On Thu, Jun 13, 2019 at 08:11:33AM -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote:
>> On 6/13/19 1:32 AM, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
>> > This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 4.14.126 release.
>> > There are 81 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 15 Jun 2019 07:54:51 AM UTC.
>> > Anything received after that time might be too late.
>> >
>>
>> [early feedback]
>>
>> Building mips:nlm_xlp_defconfig ... failed (and other mips builds)
>> --------------
>> Error log:
>> /opt/buildbot/slave/stable-queue-4.14/build/arch/mips/kernel/prom.c: In function 'early_init_dt_add_memory_arch':
>> /opt/buildbot/slave/stable-queue-4.14/build/arch/mips/kernel/prom.c:44:14: error: 'PHYS_ADDR_MAX' undeclared
>>
>> The problem affects v4.14.y and all earlier branches.
>> PHYS_ADDR_MAX is indeed undeclared in those branches. It was introduced
>> with commit 1c4bc43ddfd52 ("mm/memblock: introduce PHYS_ADDR_MAX").
>
>Thanks, I've dropped the mips patch that caused this.  I'll also drop it
>from the 4.4 and 4.9 trees.
>
>Sasha, I thought you had builders set up for stuff like this?

Yes, and apparently I was naive thinking that
'allmodconfig'/'allyesconfig' would catch these, but that's not the
case.

--
Thanks,
Sasha