On Mon, 23 Jan 2023 at 08:24, Greg Kroah-Hartman gregkh@linuxfoundation.org wrote:
On Mon, Jan 23, 2023 at 12:39:55PM +0530, Naresh Kamboju wrote:
On Sun, 22 Jan 2023 at 20:46, Greg Kroah-Hartman gregkh@linuxfoundation.org wrote:
This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 5.15.90 release. There are 117 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 Tue, 24 Jan 2023 15:02:08 +0000. Anything received after that time might be too late.
The whole patch series can be found in one patch at: https://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/v5.x/stable-review/patch-5.15.90-rc1... or in the git tree and branch at: git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/stable/linux-stable-rc.git linux-5.15.y and the diffstat can be found below.
thanks,
greg k-h
Results from Linaro’s test farm.
Reported-by: Linux Kernel Functional Testing lkft@linaro.org
Build regressions found on sh:
- build/gcc-8-dreamcast_defconfig
- build/gcc-8-microdev_defconfig
Build error logs:
`.exit.text' referenced in section `__bug_table' of crypto/algboss.o: defined in discarded section `.exit.text' of crypto/algboss.o `.exit.text' referenced in section `__bug_table' of drivers/char/hw_random/core.o: defined in discarded section `.exit.text' of drivers/char/hw_random/core.o make[1]: *** [/builds/linux/Makefile:1218: vmlinux] Error 1
Bisection points to this commit, arch: fix broken BuildID for arm64 and riscv commit 99cb0d917ffa1ab628bb67364ca9b162c07699b1 upstream.
Ref: upstream discussion thread, https://lore.kernel.org/all/Y7Jal56f6UBh1abE@dev-arch.thelio-3990X/
Argh, what a mess. Ok, let me rip out that commit (and the "fixes up that commit") series from the trees and push out a -rc2 in a few hours after I wake up. I was worried about that one, and I should have trusted my first instinct...
The patch in question has
Fixes: 994b7ac1697b ("arm64: remove special treatment for the link order of head.o") Fixes: 2348e6bf4421 ("riscv: remove special treatment for the link order of head.o")
both of which were introduced in the current v6.2 cycle.
Neither of those are marked for stable, are obviously non-stable material, and were not queued up themselves.
So how did we end up queuing these in the first place?