linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 4.19 000/219] 4.19.92-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: <20191231161824.GA2279398@kroah.com>
Date:   Tue, 31 Dec 2019 17:18:24 +0100
From:   Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To:     Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>
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 4.19 000/219] 4.19.92-stable review

On Tue, Dec 31, 2019 at 08:05:19AM -0800, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 29, 2019 at 06:16:42PM +0100, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> > This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 4.19.92 release.
> > There are 219 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 Tue, 31 Dec 2019 16:17:25 +0000.
> > Anything received after that time might be too late.
> 
> For -rc2:
> 
> Build results:
> 	total: 156 pass: 156 fail: 0
> Qemu test results:
> 	total: 381 pass: 376 fail: 5
> Failed tests:
> 	ppc64:mac99:ppc64_book3s_defconfig:smp:initrd
> 	ppc64:mac99:ppc64_book3s_defconfig:smp:ide:rootfs
> 	ppc64:mac99:ppc64_book3s_defconfig:smp:sdhci:mmc:rootfs
> 	ppc64:mac99:ppc64_book3s_defconfig:smp:nvme:rootfs
> 	ppc64:mac99:ppc64_book3s_defconfig:smp:scsi[DC395]:rootfs
> 
> Bug-for-bug compatible with mainline. That makes me wonder if I should
> stop testing those ppc images instead of being annoyed by the failures.
> Thoughts ?

I think the ppc developers need to fix the issues.  Or just mark the
configuration as obsolete and remove it from mainline?

thanks,

greg k-h