linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 5.10 000/199] 5.10.11-rc1 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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

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

Date:   Mon, 25 Jan 2021 12:18:06 -0800
From:   Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>
To:     Daniel Díaz <daniel.diaz@...aro.org>
Cc:     Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, shuah@...nel.org,
        patches@...nelci.org, lkft-triage@...ts.linaro.org,
        stable@...r.kernel.org, pavel@...x.de, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
        torvalds@...ux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5.10 000/199] 5.10.11-rc1 review

On Mon, Jan 25, 2021 at 01:36:03PM -0600, Daniel Díaz wrote:
> Hello!
> 
> 
> On 1/25/21 12:37 PM, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> > This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 5.10.11 release.
> > There are 199 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 Wed, 27 Jan 2021 18:31:44 +0000.
> > Anything received after that time might be too late.
> > 
> > The whole patch series can be found in one patch at:
> > 	https://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/v5.x/stable-review/patch-5.10.11-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-5.10.y
> > and the diffstat can be found below.
> > 
> > thanks,
> > 
> > greg k-h
> 
> Sanity results from Linaro’s test farm.
> Regressions detected.
> 
[ ... ]
> 
> Errors look like the following:
> 
>   make --silent --keep-going --jobs=8 O=/home/tuxbuild/.cache/tuxmake/builds/1/tmp ARCH=x86_64 CROSS_COMPILE=x86_64-linux-gnu- 'CC=sccache x86_64-linux-gnu-gcc' 'HOSTCC=sccache gcc'
>   /builds/1nZbYji0zW0SkEnWMrDznWWzerI/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/amd.c: In function 'bsp_init_amd':
>   /builds/1nZbYji0zW0SkEnWMrDznWWzerI/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/amd.c:572:3: error: '__max_die_per_package' undeclared (first use in this function); did you mean 'topology_max_die_per_package'?
>     572 |   __max_die_per_package = nodes_per_socket = ((ecx >> 8) & 7) + 1;
>         |   ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>         |   topology_max_die_per_package
> 
> Will find out more soon.
> 

This may be due to commit 76e2fc63ca40 ("x86/cpu/amd: Set __max_die_per_package
on AMD").

Our patches robot tells me:

SHA 76e2fc63ca40 recursively fixed by: 1eb8f690bcb5

I don't see commit 1eb8f690bcb5 ("x86/topology: Make __max_die_per_package
available unconditionally") in the commit log. I have not checked,
but it is at least possible that applying it fixes the problem.

Guenter