linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 6.12 00/89] 6.12.50-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: <7c481b23-d623-4fc8-9b31-78db6d1f7245@roeck-us.net>
Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2025 12:18:08 -0700
From: Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>
To: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>, stable@...r.kernel.org
Cc: patches@...ts.linux.dev, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
 torvalds@...ux-foundation.org, akpm@...ux-foundation.org, 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,
 rwarsow@....de, conor@...nel.org, hargar@...rosoft.com, broonie@...nel.org,
 achill@...ill.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 6.12 00/89] 6.12.50-rc1 review

On 9/30/25 07:47, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 6.12.50 release.
> There are 89 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, 02 Oct 2025 14:37:59 +0000.
> Anything received after that time might be too late.
> 

s390:allmodconfig:
parisc:allmodconfig:

drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_backlight.c: In function 'scale':
././include/linux/compiler_types.h:536:45: error:
	call to '__compiletime_assert_666' declared with attribute error: clamp() low limit source_min greater than high limit source_max
include/linux/compiler_types.h:517:25: note: in definition of macro '__compiletime_assert'
   517 |                         prefix ## suffix();                             \
       |                         ^~~~~~
include/linux/compiler_types.h:536:9: note: in expansion of macro '_compiletime_assert'
   536 |         _compiletime_assert(condition, msg, __compiletime_assert_, __COUNTER__)
       |         ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
include/linux/build_bug.h:39:37: note: in expansion of macro 'compiletime_assert'
    39 | #define BUILD_BUG_ON_MSG(cond, msg) compiletime_assert(!(cond), msg)
       |                                     ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
include/linux/minmax.h:188:9: note: in expansion of macro 'BUILD_BUG_ON_MSG'
   188 |         BUILD_BUG_ON_MSG(statically_true(ulo > uhi),                            \
       |         ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
include/linux/minmax.h:195:9: note: in expansion of macro '__clamp_once'
   195 |         __clamp_once(type, val, lo, hi, __UNIQUE_ID(v_), __UNIQUE_ID(l_), __UNIQUE_ID(h_))
       |         ^~~~~~~~~~~~
include/linux/minmax.h:206:28: note: in expansion of macro '__careful_clamp'
   206 | #define clamp(val, lo, hi) __careful_clamp(__auto_type, val, lo, hi)
       |                            ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_backlight.c:47:22: note: in expansion of macro 'clamp'
    47 |         source_val = clamp(source_val, source_min, source_max);

This is exposed by the minmax patch series, as with 6.12.49.

Fixed upstream with commit 6f7150741584 ("drm/i915/backlight: Return immediately
when scale() finds invalid parameters"). This patch also includes an explanation
of what exactly happens (and thanks again to Linus for the analysis).

Guenter