linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 6.1 000/208] 6.1.11-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: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

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

Date:   Thu, 9 Feb 2023 11:24:01 +0100
From:   Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To:     Peter Xu <peterx@...hat.com>
Cc:     Naresh Kamboju <naresh.kamboju@...aro.org>, stable@...r.kernel.org,
        patches@...ts.linux.dev, linux-kernel@...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, sudipm.mukherjee@...il.com,
        srw@...dewatkins.net, rwarsow@....de,
        Mike Kravetz <mike.kravetz@...cle.com>,
        Jann Horn <jannh@...gle.com>,
        Anders Roxell <anders.roxell@...aro.org>,
        "open list:KERNEL SELFTEST FRAMEWORK" 
        <linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 6.1 000/208] 6.1.11-rc1 review

On Tue, Feb 07, 2023 at 12:26:33PM -0500, Peter Xu wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 07, 2023 at 10:35:19PM +0530, Naresh Kamboju wrote:
> > On Tue, 7 Feb 2023 at 18:29, Greg Kroah-Hartman
> > <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 6.1.11 release.
> > > There are 208 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 Thu, 09 Feb 2023 12:55:54 +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/v6.x/stable-review/patch-6.1.11-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-6.1.y
> > > and the diffstat can be found below.
> > >
> > > thanks,
> > >
> > > greg k-h
> > 
> > Results from Linaro’s test farm.
> > Following build regressions noticed while building
> > selftests/vm/hugetlb-madvise.c
> > with kselftest-merge configs.
> > 
> > Reported-by: Linux Kernel Functional Testing <lkft@...aro.org>
> > 
> > Build errors:
> > ----------
> > hugetlb-madvise.c:242:13: warning: implicit declaration of function
> > 'fallocate'; did you mean 'alloca'? [-Wimplicit-function-declaration]
> >   242 |         if (fallocate(fd, 0, 0, NR_HUGE_PAGES * huge_page_size)) {
> >       |             ^~~~~~~~~
> >       |             alloca
> > hugetlb-madvise.c:289:27: error: 'FALLOC_FL_PUNCH_HOLE' undeclared
> > (first use in this function)
> >   289 |         if (fallocate(fd, FALLOC_FL_PUNCH_HOLE | FALLOC_FL_KEEP_SIZE,
> >       |                           ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> > hugetlb-madvise.c:289:27: note: each undeclared identifier is reported
> > only once for each function it appears in
> > hugetlb-madvise.c:289:50: error: 'FALLOC_FL_KEEP_SIZE' undeclared
> > (first use in this function)
> >   289 |         if (fallocate(fd, FALLOC_FL_PUNCH_HOLE | FALLOC_FL_KEEP_SIZE,
> >       |                                                  ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> > make[3]: *** [../lib.mk:145:
> > /home/tuxbuild/.cache/tuxmake/builds/1/build/kselftest/vm/hugetlb-madvise]
> > Error 1
> > 
> > Build log:
> > https://gitlab.com/Linaro/lkft/mirrors/stable/linux-stable-rc/-/jobs/3728198425#L1676
> > https://storage.tuxsuite.com/public/linaro/lkft/builds/2LPeQeCIu0YEfltwqAFCvDaj29A/
> 
> I think we should drop the patch "[PATCH 6.1 012/208] selftests/vm: remove
> __USE_GNU in hugetlb-madvise.c" from this merge.
> 
> That patch fixes commit 62f33fa22800 ("selftests/vm: use memfd for
> hugetlb-madvise test"), but that's only in 6.2-rc1 and it's not in 6.1.
> 
> I don't really know why it got picked for 6.1 stable backport, because the
> original patch doesn't contain "CC: stable".

Now dropped, thanks!

greg k-h