linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 6.1 00/25] 6.1.1-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]

Date:   Tue, 20 Dec 2022 08:11:35 -0800
From:   Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>
To:     Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
Cc:     stable@...r.kernel.org, patches@...ts.linux.dev,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, torvalds@...ux-foundation.org,
        akpm@...ux-foundation.org, shuah@...nel.org, patches@...nelci.org,
        lkft-triage@...ts.linaro.org, pavel@...x.de, jonathanh@...dia.com,
        f.fainelli@...il.com, sudipm.mukherjee@...il.com,
        srw@...dewatkins.net, rwarsow@....de
Subject: Re: [PATCH 6.1 00/25] 6.1.1-rc1 review

On Tue, Dec 20, 2022 at 04:10:55PM +0100, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 20, 2022 at 07:00:49AM -0800, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> > On Mon, Dec 19, 2022 at 08:22:39PM +0100, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> > > This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 6.1.1 release.
> > > There are 25 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, 21 Dec 2022 18:29:31 +0000.
> > > Anything received after that time might be too late.
> > > 
> > 
> > Build results:
> > 	total: 155 pass: 155 fail: 0
> > Qemu test results:
> > 	total: 500 pass: 498 fail: 2
> > Failed tests:
> > 	arm:xilinx-zynq-a9:multi_v7_defconfig:usb0:mem128:net,default:zynq-zc702:rootfs
> > 	arm:xilinx-zynq-a9:multi_v7_defconfig:usb0:mem128:zynq-zed:rootfs
> > 
> > The failure bisects to commit e013ba1e4e12 ("usb: ulpi: defer ulpi_register on
> > ulpi_read_id timeout") and is inherited from mainline. Reverting the offending
> > patch fixes the problem.
> 
> Odd, yet that same commit works just fine on 6.0 and 5.15 and 5.10?  I
> hadn't had any reports of this being an issue on Linus's tree either,
> did I miss those?
> 

I testbed has a bad hair day. The reports for the other branches are wrong.
I restarted the tests and expect them to fail there as well. Sorry for that.

You probably didn't see any reports on mainline because I didn't report
the issue there yet. There are so many failures in mainline that it is
a bit difficult to keep up. This would be a full-time job, and I just
don't have that much time, sorry.

Guenter