linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 6.6 000/741] 6.6.33-rc2 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: Wed, 19 Jun 2024 16:48:35 +0200
From: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To: Conor Dooley <conor@...nel.org>
Cc: Conor Dooley <conor.dooley@...rochip.com>, Ron Economos <re@...z.net>,
	Pavel Machek <pavel@...x.de>, 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, jonathanh@...dia.com,
	f.fainelli@...il.com, sudipm.mukherjee@...il.com,
	srw@...dewatkins.net, rwarsow@....de, allen.lkml@...il.com,
	broonie@...nel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 6.6 000/741] 6.6.33-rc2 review

On Wed, Jun 19, 2024 at 03:28:18PM +0100, Conor Dooley wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 11, 2024 at 03:06:01PM +0200, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> > On Mon, Jun 10, 2024 at 08:26:10AM +0100, Conor Dooley wrote:
> > > On Mon, Jun 10, 2024 at 08:28:29AM +0200, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> > > > On Sun, Jun 09, 2024 at 11:21:55PM -0700, Ron Economos wrote:
> > > > > On 6/9/24 12:34 PM, Pavel Machek wrote:
> > > > > > Hi!
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > > This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 6.6.33 release.
> > > > > > > There are 741 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.
> > > > > > 6.6 seems to have build problem on risc-v:
> > > 
> > > > > > arch/riscv/kernel/suspend.c:14:66: error: 'RISCV_ISA_EXT_XLINUXENVCFG' undeclared (first use in this function); did you mean 'RISCV_ISA_EXT_ZIFENCEI'?
> > > > > > 694
> > > > > >     14 |         if (riscv_cpu_has_extension_unlikely(smp_processor_id(), RISCV_ISA_EXT_XLINUXENVCFG))
> > > > > > 695
> > > > > >        |                                                                  ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> > > > > > 696
> > > > > >        |                                                                  RISCV_ISA_EXT_ZIFENCEI
> > > 
> > > > > > https://gitlab.com/cip-project/cip-testing/linux-stable-rc-ci/-/jobs/7053222239
> > > > > > https://gitlab.com/cip-project/cip-testing/linux-stable-rc-ci/-/pipelines/1324369118
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > No problems detected on 6.8-stable and 6.1-stable.
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Best regards,
> > > > > > 								Pavel
> > > > > 
> > > > > I'm seeing the same thing here. Somehow some extra patches got slipped in
> > > > > between rc1 and rc2. The new patches for RISC-V are:
> > > > > 
> > > > > Samuel Holland <samuel.holland@...ive.com>
> > > > >     riscv: Save/restore envcfg CSR during CPU suspend
> > > > > 
> > > > > commit 88b55a586b87994a33e0285c9e8881485e9b77ea
> > > > > 
> > > > > Samuel Holland <samuel.holland@...ive.com>
> > > > >     riscv: Fix enabling cbo.zero when running in M-mode
> > > > > 
> > > > > commit 8c6e096cf527d65e693bfbf00aa6791149c58552
> > > > > 
> > > > > The first patch "riscv: Save/restore envcfg CSR during CPU suspend" causes
> > > > > the build failure.
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > Yes, these were added because they were marked as fixes for other
> > > > commits in the series.  I'll unwind them all now as something is going
> > > > wrong...
> > > 
> > > Really we should just backport this envcfg handling to stable, this
> > > isn't the first (and won't be the last) issue it'll cause. I'll put a
> > > backport of it on my todo list cos I think last time around it couldn't
> > > be cherrypicked.
> > 
> > Thanks, I've dropped almost all riscv patches from this queue now.  If
> > they want to be added back, please send working backports :)
> 
> I went to take a look at this, but since 6.8 is now EOL, I dunno if I
> actually need to do anything here? These were needed because you had
> applied "RISC-V: Enable cbo.zero in usermode", but that's a feature, not
> a fix, so dropping that makes these changes unneeded. IIRC the previous
> time that there was an envcfg related build failure it was on the
> requested backport to 6.7+ in the envcfg addition in "riscv: Add a custom
> ISA extension for the [ms]envcfg CSR", and an assertion failed because
> of a definition for the maximum number of ISA extensions was larger in
> 6.9 than 6.7 and the patch depended on that.

Yes, 6.8.y is end-of-life, nothing needs to be done there anymore.

> For 6.6, I don't think envcfg is needed, unless there was some other
> reason that you backported "RISC-V: Enable cbo.zero in usermode".

I hope not :)

thanks for looking.

greg k-h