linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 5.4 000/411] 5.4.198-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: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

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

Message-ID: <YqhiKTSONZPHwXES@debian>
Date:   Tue, 14 Jun 2022 11:25:45 +0100
From:   Sudip Mukherjee <sudipm.mukherjee@...il.com>
To:     Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, stable@...r.kernel.org,
        torvalds@...ux-foundation.org, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
        linux@...ck-us.net, shuah@...nel.org, patches@...nelci.org,
        lkft-triage@...ts.linaro.org, pavel@...x.de, jonathanh@...dia.com,
        f.fainelli@...il.com, slade@...dewatkins.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5.4 000/411] 5.4.198-rc1 review

Hi Greg,

On Mon, Jun 13, 2022 at 12:04:33PM +0200, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 5.4.198 release.
> There are 411 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, 15 Jun 2022 09:47:08 +0000.
> Anything received after that time might be too late.

Build test (gcc version 11.3.1 20220612):
mips: 65 configs -> no failure
arm: 106 configs -> no failure
arm64: 2 configs -> no failure
x86_64: 4 configs -> no failure
alpha allmodconfig -> no failure
s390 allmodconfig -> no failure
xtensa allmodconfig -> no failure

powerpc allmodconfig and riscv allmodconfig failed to build.
backported patches sent separately.


Boot test:
x86_64: Booted on my test laptop. No regression.
x86_64: Booted on qemu. No regression. [1]

[1]. https://openqa.qa.codethink.co.uk/tests/1316


Tested-by: Sudip Mukherjee <sudip.mukherjee@...ethink.co.uk>

--
Regards
Sudip