[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <ce99918f-eb6a-4ad7-aa44-9d27c27b6b00@app.fastmail.com>
Date: Tue, 05 Dec 2023 17:13:22 +0100
From: "Arnd Bergmann" <arnd@...db.de>
To: "Naresh Kamboju" <naresh.kamboju@...aro.org>,
"Greg Kroah-Hartman" <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
"Johannes Berg" <johannes.berg@...el.com>
Cc: stable@...r.kernel.org, patches@...ts.linux.dev,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
"Linus Torvalds" <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
"Andrew Morton" <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
"Guenter Roeck" <linux@...ck-us.net>, shuah <shuah@...nel.org>,
patches@...nelci.org, lkft-triage@...ts.linaro.org,
"Pavel Machek" <pavel@...x.de>,
"Jon Hunter" <jonathanh@...dia.com>,
"Florian Fainelli" <f.fainelli@...il.com>,
"Sudip Mukherjee" <sudipm.mukherjee@...il.com>,
srw@...dewatkins.net, rwarsow@....de,
"Conor Dooley" <conor@...nel.org>, allen.lkml@...il.com,
Netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 6.6 000/134] 6.6.5-rc1 review
On Tue, Dec 5, 2023, at 16:53, Naresh Kamboju wrote:
> On Tue, 5 Dec 2023 at 08:51, Greg Kroah-Hartman
> <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org> wrote:
>>
>> This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 6.6.5 release.
>> There are 134 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, 07 Dec 2023 03:14:57 +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-6.6.5-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-6.6.y
>> and the diffstat can be found below.
>>
>
> The x86 allmodconfig with gcc-8 failed but passed with gcc-13.
>
> x86_64: gcc-8-allmodconfig: FAILED
> x86_64: gcc-13-allmodconfig: PASS
Note that at the moment gcc-13 (also 11 and 12) turns off the
-Warray-bounds checks because of excessive false positives,
see 0da6e5fd6c37 ("gcc: disable '-Warray-bounds' for gcc-13 too").
I have not yet figured out what gcc-8 complains about,
but I assume that gcc-13 would find the same thing with
the check enabled.
Arnd
Powered by blists - more mailing lists