linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 6.2 000/211] 6.2.4-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:   Sat, 11 Mar 2023 12:30:26 +0000
From:   Sudip Mukherjee <sudipm.mukherjee@...il.com>
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, 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, srw@...dewatkins.net,
        rwarsow@....de
Subject: Re: [PATCH 6.2 000/211] 6.2.4-rc1 review

Hi Greg,

On Fri, Mar 10, 2023 at 02:36:20PM +0100, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 6.2.4 release.
> There are 211 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 Sun, 12 Mar 2023 13:36:38 +0000.
> Anything received after that time might be too late.

Build test (gcc version 12.2.1 20230210):
mips: 52 configs -> no failure
arm: 100 configs -> no failure
arm64: 3 configs -> no failure
x86_64: 4 configs -> no failure
alpha allmodconfig -> no failure
csky allmodconfig -> no failure
powerpc allmodconfig -> no failure
riscv allmodconfig -> no failure
s390 allmodconfig -> no failure
xtensa allmodconfig -> no failure

Boot test:
x86_64: Booted on my test laptop. No regression.
x86_64: Booted on qemu. No regression. [1]
arm64: Booted on rpi4b (4GB model). No regression. [2]

[1]. https://openqa.qa.codethink.co.uk/tests/3082
[2]. https://openqa.qa.codethink.co.uk/tests/3085

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

-- 
Regards
Sudip