linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 4.19 00/97] 4.19.300-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: <2023112526-launder-slashed-ab21@gregkh>
Date:   Sat, 25 Nov 2023 15:43:59 +0000
From:   Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To:     Daniel Díaz <daniel.diaz@...aro.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,
        sudipm.mukherjee@...il.com, srw@...dewatkins.net, rwarsow@....de,
        conor@...nel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4.19 00/97] 4.19.300-rc1 review

On Fri, Nov 24, 2023 at 01:13:33PM -0600, Daniel Díaz wrote:
> Hello!
> 
> On 24/11/23 11:49 a. m., Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> > This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 4.19.300 release.
> > There are 97 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, 26 Nov 2023 17:19:17 +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/v4.x/stable-review/patch-4.19.300-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-4.19.y
> > and the diffstat can be found below.
> > 
> > thanks,
> > 
> > greg k-h
> 
> We see this failure on Arm32:
> -----8<-----
>   /builds/linux/drivers/tty/serial/meson_uart.c: In function 'meson_uart_probe':
>   /builds/linux/drivers/tty/serial/meson_uart.c:728:13: error: 'struct uart_port' has no member named 'has_sysrq'
>     728 |         port->has_sysrq = IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_SERIAL_MESON_CONSOLE);
>         |             ^~
>   make[4]: *** [/builds/linux/scripts/Makefile.build:303: drivers/tty/serial/meson_uart.o] Error 1
> ----->8-----

Thanks, now fixed.

> And this one on Arm64:
> -----8<-----
>   /builds/linux/kernel/profile.c: In function 'profile_dead_cpu':
>   /builds/linux/kernel/profile.c:346:27: warning: the comparison will always evaluate as 'true' for the address of 'prof_cpu_mask' will never be NULL [-Waddress]
>     346 |         if (prof_cpu_mask != NULL)
>         |                           ^~
>   /builds/linux/kernel/profile.c:49:22: note: 'prof_cpu_mask' declared here
>      49 | static cpumask_var_t prof_cpu_mask;
>         |                      ^~~~~~~~~~~~~
>   /builds/linux/kernel/profile.c: In function 'profile_online_cpu':
>   /builds/linux/kernel/profile.c:383:27: warning: the comparison will always evaluate as 'true' for the address of 'prof_cpu_mask' will never be NULL [-Waddress]
>     383 |         if (prof_cpu_mask != NULL)
>         |                           ^~
>   /builds/linux/kernel/profile.c:49:22: note: 'prof_cpu_mask' declared here
>      49 | static cpumask_var_t prof_cpu_mask;
>         |                      ^~~~~~~~~~~~~
>   /builds/linux/kernel/profile.c: In function 'profile_tick':
>   /builds/linux/kernel/profile.c:413:47: warning: the comparison will always evaluate as 'true' for the address of 'prof_cpu_mask' will never be NULL [-Waddress]
>     413 |         if (!user_mode(regs) && prof_cpu_mask != NULL &&
>         |                                               ^~
>   /builds/linux/kernel/profile.c:49:22: note: 'prof_cpu_mask' declared here
>      49 | static cpumask_var_t prof_cpu_mask;
>         |                      ^~~~~~~~~~~~~
> ----->8-----

Is this new?  No code in this -rc touches this file, or prof_cpu_mask
that I can tell.  Hints for what went wrong would be appreciated...

thanks,

greg k-h