On Tue, Jul 04, 2023 at 11:56:11AM +0200, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
On 04.07.23 10:47, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
On Tue, Jul 04, 2023 at 02:13:03PM +0530, Harshit Mogalapalli wrote:
On 04/07/23 1:54 pm, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
While running LTP hugetlb testing on x86 the following kernel BUG noticed on running stable-rc 6.3.12-rc1.
Have you looked at Patch 9 of this series:
https://lore.kernel.org/stable/2023070416-wow-phrasing-b92c@gregkh/T/#m12068...
Looks very much related, it also has a note on Backporting. As I think it could be related, I am sharing this.(But haven't tested anything)
Yes, that's the offending patch. I should have read over the full changelogs before doing bisection, but bisection/test proved that this was not correct for 6.3.y at this point in time.
FWIW, I'm preparing a few small tweaks for Documentation/process/stable-kernel-rules.rst (to be submitted after the merge window). I among others consider adding something like this that might help avoiding this situation:
To delay pick up of patches submitted via :ref:`option_1`, use the following format: .. code-block:: none Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org> # after 4 weeks in mainline For any other requests related to patches submitted via :ref:`option_1`, just add a note to the stable tag. This for example can be used to point out known problems: .. code-block:: none Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org> # see patch description, needs adjustments for 6.3 and earlierGreg, if this is stupid or in case you want it to say something else, just say so.
That looks great, hopefully people notice this. We still have a huge number of people refusing to even put cc: stable in a patch, let alone these extra hints :)
thanks,
greg k-h