linux-kernel - Re: linux-next: Tree for Jul 11 [drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu.ko]

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]

Message-ID: <CAJZ5v0jejQBii9U+69PUjqzebrdWPky93ZoJ9wKuqeGDpK--JQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 13 Jul 2025 13:34:31 +0200
From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>
To: Mario Limonciello <superm1@...nel.org>
Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>, Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...radead.org>, 
	Mario Limonciello <mario.limonciello@....com>, Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>, 
	Linux Next Mailing List <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>, 
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, 
	Linux DRI Development <dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org>, Samuel Zhang <guoqing.zhang@....com>, 
	amd-gfx@...ts.freedesktop.org
Subject: Re: linux-next: Tree for Jul 11 [drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu.ko]

On Sat, Jul 12, 2025 at 9:02 PM Mario Limonciello <superm1@...nel.org> wrote:
>
>
>
> On 7/12/25 3:11 AM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > On Fri, Jul 11, 2025 at 11:25 PM Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...radead.org> wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On 7/11/25 2:10 AM, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> >>> Hi all,
> >>>
> >>> Changes since 20250710:
> >>>
> >>
> >> on x86_64, when
> >> # CONFIG_SUSPEND is not set
> >> # CONFIG_HIBERNATION is not set
> >> # CONFIG_PM is not set
> >>
> >> ERROR: modpost: "pm_hibernate_is_recovering" [drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu.ko] undefined!
> >>
> >> caused by commit
> >> 530694f54dd5e ("drm/amdgpu: do not resume device in thaw for normal hibernation")
> >>
> >> Rafael, is a stub appropriate for this case?
> >
> > pm_hibernate_is_recovering() is not supposed to be called by code that
> > does not depend on CONFIG_HIBERNATE_CALLBACKS, but a stub returning
> > false would work for this.
>
> Thanks, I just sent out a fix for this.
>
> >
> > Mario, it would be good to fix this up in your tree.  Also, it would
> > be good to expose stuff to 0-day build testing before letting it go
> > into linux-next.  I use the bleeding-edge branch for this purpose.
> >
> Honestly; I'm surprised that 0-day didn't raise this on either dri-devel
> or amd-gfx.  I had expected at least one of those lists to raise this
> over the last week of patches.
>
> Anyone know the history why neither has 0-day?

Maybe they do, but it had too little time to get to testing  them.

That's why I asked 0-day to send success reports too for my
bleeding-edge branch.  When I get a report (either failure or success)
for it, I know that it has been tested.