linux-kernel - Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the tip tree

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: <20260109111744.07e51bf5c0bde0e419d09b34@linux-foundation.org>
Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2026 11:17:44 -0800
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
Cc: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>, Thomas Gleixner
 <tglx@...utronix.de>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>, "H. Peter Anvin"
 <hpa@...or.com>, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>, Linux Kernel
 Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Linux Next Mailing List
 <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the tip tree

On Fri, 9 Jan 2026 18:29:55 +0100 Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de> wrote:

> Well, what can I say: I have been trying for a long time to get akpm to *stop*
> taking patches touching arch/x86/ because this causes issues but nope, that
> still goes on.
> 
> The issue now is cross-tree build failure which ends up in linux-next and gets
> detected there. Had this patch above been in tip, none of that would've
> happened.
> 
> So, Andrew, once again: please stop taking patches touching arch/x86!

This is utterly impractical without support from the x86 maintainers.

I upstream a *lot* of patchsets which alter x86.

I looked once.  5% of those patches had an Acked-by or Reviewed-by from
an x86 maintainer.

I cc you guys until I'm blue in the face and it's always crickets.  I
simply cannot permit MM or kexec progress to be blocked by the
unresponsiveness of the x86 team.  It's very regrettable but it's
almost always the case that I just have to proceed without your
assistance.

This particular patchset is a kexec thing so I added it for testing
because I look after kexec.  I'll drop it and shall trust you to handle
Coiby's contribution in an appropriate fashion.