This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 5.10.171 release.
There are 19 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 Fri, 03 Mar 2023 18:06:43 +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-5.10.171-rc1.gz
or in the git tree and branch at:
git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/stable/linux-stable-rc.git linux-5.10.y
and the diffstat can be found below.
thanks,
greg k-h
-------------
Pseudo-Shortlog of commits:
Greg Kroah-Hartman <[email protected]>
Linux 5.10.171-rc1
Alan Stern <[email protected]>
USB: core: Don't hold device lock while reading the "descriptors" sysfs file
Prashanth K <[email protected]>
usb: gadget: u_serial: Add null pointer check in gserial_resume
Florian Zumbiehl <[email protected]>
USB: serial: option: add support for VW/Skoda "Carstick LTE"
Dmitry Osipenko <[email protected]>
drm/virtio: Correct drm_gem_shmem_get_sg_table() error handling
Miaoqian Lin <[email protected]>
drm/virtio: Fix NULL vs IS_ERR checking in virtio_gpu_object_shmem_init
Carlos Llamas <[email protected]>
scripts/tags.sh: fix incompatibility with PCRE2
Cristian Ciocaltea <[email protected]>
scripts/tags.sh: Invoke 'realpath' via 'xargs'
David Sloan <[email protected]>
md: Flush workqueue md_rdev_misc_wq in md_alloc()
Thomas Weißschuh <[email protected]>
vc_screen: don't clobber return value in vcs_read
Kuniyuki Iwashima <[email protected]>
net: Remove WARN_ON_ONCE(sk->sk_forward_alloc) from sk_stream_kill_queues().
Martin KaFai Lau <[email protected]>
bpf: bpf_fib_lookup should not return neigh in NUD_FAILED state
Xin Zhao <[email protected]>
HID: core: Fix deadloop in hid_apply_multiplier.
Julian Anastasov <[email protected]>
neigh: make sure used and confirmed times are valid
Dean Luick <[email protected]>
IB/hfi1: Assign npages earlier
David Sterba <[email protected]>
btrfs: send: limit number of clones and allocated memory size
Vishal Verma <[email protected]>
ACPI: NFIT: fix a potential deadlock during NFIT teardown
Johan Jonker <[email protected]>
ARM: dts: rockchip: add power-domains property to dp node on rk3288
Krzysztof Kozlowski <[email protected]>
arm64: dts: rockchip: drop unused LED mode property from rk3328-roc-cc
Benedict Wong <[email protected]>
Fix XFRM-I support for nested ESP tunnels
-------------
Diffstat:
Makefile | 4 +-
arch/arm/boot/dts/rk3288.dtsi | 1 +
arch/arm64/boot/dts/rockchip/rk3328-roc-cc.dts | 2 -
drivers/acpi/nfit/core.c | 2 +-
drivers/gpu/drm/virtio/virtgpu_object.c | 5 ++-
drivers/hid/hid-core.c | 3 ++
drivers/infiniband/hw/hfi1/user_exp_rcv.c | 9 +----
drivers/md/md.c | 1 +
drivers/tty/vt/vc_screen.c | 7 ++--
drivers/usb/core/hub.c | 5 +--
drivers/usb/core/sysfs.c | 5 ---
drivers/usb/gadget/function/u_serial.c | 23 +++++++++--
drivers/usb/serial/option.c | 4 ++
fs/btrfs/send.c | 6 +--
net/caif/caif_socket.c | 1 +
net/core/filter.c | 4 +-
net/core/neighbour.c | 18 +++++++--
net/core/stream.c | 1 -
net/xfrm/xfrm_interface.c | 54 ++++++++++++++++++++++++--
net/xfrm/xfrm_policy.c | 3 ++
scripts/tags.sh | 11 ++++--
21 files changed, 123 insertions(+), 46 deletions(-)
On 3/1/2023 10:08 AM, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 5.10.171 release.
> There are 19 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 Fri, 03 Mar 2023 18:06:43 +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-5.10.171-rc1.gz
> or in the git tree and branch at:
> git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/stable/linux-stable-rc.git linux-5.10.y
> and the diffstat can be found below.
>
> thanks,
>
> greg k-h
On ARCH_BRCMSTB using 32-bit and 64-bit ARM kernels, build tested on
BMIPS_GENERIC:
Tested-by: Florian Fainelli <[email protected]>
--
Florian
On 3/1/23 13:08, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 5.10.171 release.
> There are 19 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 Fri, 03 Mar 2023 18:06:43 +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-5.10.171-rc1.gz
> or in the git tree and branch at:
> git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/stable/linux-stable-rc.git linux-5.10.y
> and the diffstat can be found below.
5.10.171-rc1 compiled and booted on my x86_64 test system. No errors or
regressions.
Tested-by: Slade Watkins <[email protected]>
-- Slade
Hi!
> This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 5.10.171 release.
> There are 19 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.
AFAICT we should not need this patch -- we don't have b5fc29233d28 in
5.10, so the assertion seems to be at the correct place here.
> Kuniyuki Iwashima <[email protected]>
> net: Remove WARN_ON_ONCE(sk->sk_forward_alloc) from
> sk_stream_kill_queues().
CIP testing did not find any problems here:
https://gitlab.com/cip-project/cip-testing/linux-stable-rc-ci/-/tree/linux-5.10.y
Tested-by: Pavel Machek (CIP) <[email protected]>
Best regards,
Pavel
--
DENX Software Engineering GmbH, Managing Director: Wolfgang Denk
HRB 165235 Munich, Office: Kirchenstr.5, D-82194 Groebenzell, Germany
On 3/1/23 17:03, Pavel Machek wrote:
> Hi!
>
>> This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 5.10.171 release.
>> There are 19 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.
>
> AFAICT we should not need this patch -- we don't have b5fc29233d28 in
> 5.10, so the assertion seems to be at the correct place here.
This (b5fc29233d28be7a3322848ebe73ac327559cdb9) appears to be in linux-5.10.y,
though?
https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/stable/linux.git/commit/?h=linux-5.10.y&id=b5fc29233d28be7a3322848ebe73ac327559cdb9
Confused,
-- Slade
>
>> Kuniyuki Iwashima <[email protected]>
>> net: Remove WARN_ON_ONCE(sk->sk_forward_alloc) from
>> sk_stream_kill_queues().
>
> CIP testing did not find any problems here:
>
> https://gitlab.com/cip-project/cip-testing/linux-stable-rc-ci/-/tree/linux-5.10.y
On 3/1/23 11:08, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 5.10.171 release.
> There are 19 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 Fri, 03 Mar 2023 18:06:43 +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-5.10.171-rc1.gz
> or in the git tree and branch at:
> git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/stable/linux-stable-rc.git linux-5.10.y
> and the diffstat can be found below.
>
> thanks,
>
> greg k-h
>
Compiled and booted on my test system. No dmesg regressions.
Tested-by: Shuah Khan <[email protected]>
thanks,
-- Shuah
On 3/1/23 14:09, Slade Watkins wrote:
> On 3/1/23 17:03, Pavel Machek wrote:
>> Hi!
>>
>>> This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 5.10.171 release.
>>> There are 19 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.
>>
>> AFAICT we should not need this patch -- we don't have b5fc29233d28 in
>> 5.10, so the assertion seems to be at the correct place here.
>
> This (b5fc29233d28be7a3322848ebe73ac327559cdb9) appears to be in linux-5.10.y,
> though?
> https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/stable/linux.git/commit/?h=linux-5.10.y&id=b5fc29233d28be7a3322848ebe73ac327559cdb9
>
> Confused,
> -- Slade
>
Also confused. My script tells me that it is _not_ in v5.10.y, and that it isn't
queued either.
Upstream commit b5fc29233d2 ("inet6: Remove inet6_destroy_sock() in sk->sk_prot->destroy().")
Integrated in v6.2-rc1
Not in 6.1.y
Not in 5.15.y
Not in 5.10.y
Not in 5.4.y
Not in 4.19.y
Not in 4.14.y
and:
$ git describe --contains b5fc29233d28be7a3322848ebe73ac327559cdb9
v6.2-rc1~99^2~393^2~4
However, it looks like 62ec33b44e0 is queued everywhere.
Upstream commit 62ec33b44e0 ("net: Remove WARN_ON_ONCE(sk->sk_forward_alloc) from sk_stream_kill_queues().")
Integrated in v6.2
Expected to be fixed in 6.1.y with next stable release (sha 29d108dc216d)
Expected to be fixed in 5.15.y with next stable release (sha 07c26a42efc3)
Expected to be fixed in 5.10.y with next stable release (sha 3ecdc3798eb9)
Expected to be fixed in 5.4.y with next stable release (sha a88c26a1210e)
Expected to be fixed in 4.19.y with next stable release (sha 60b390c291e9)
Expected to be fixed in 4.14.y with next stable release (sha b53a2b4858c2)
Guenter
>>
>>> Kuniyuki Iwashima <[email protected]>
>>> net: Remove WARN_ON_ONCE(sk->sk_forward_alloc) from
>>> sk_stream_kill_queues().
>>
>> CIP testing did not find any problems here:
>>
>> https://gitlab.com/cip-project/cip-testing/linux-stable-rc-ci/-/tree/linux-5.10.y
>
On Wed, 01 Mar 2023 19:08:29 +0100, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 5.10.171 release.
> There are 19 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 Fri, 03 Mar 2023 18:06:43 +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-5.10.171-rc1.gz
> or in the git tree and branch at:
> git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/stable/linux-stable-rc.git linux-5.10.y
> and the diffstat can be found below.
>
> thanks,
>
> greg k-h
All tests passing for Tegra ...
Test results for stable-v5.10:
11 builds: 11 pass, 0 fail
28 boots: 28 pass, 0 fail
75 tests: 75 pass, 0 fail
Linux version: 5.10.171-rc1-g032c569d266c
Boards tested: tegra124-jetson-tk1, tegra186-p2771-0000,
tegra194-p2972-0000, tegra194-p3509-0000+p3668-0000,
tegra20-ventana, tegra210-p2371-2180,
tegra210-p3450-0000, tegra30-cardhu-a04
Tested-by: Jon Hunter <[email protected]>
Jon
On Wed, Mar 01, 2023 at 09:03:51PM -0800, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> On 3/1/23 14:09, Slade Watkins wrote:
> > On 3/1/23 17:03, Pavel Machek wrote:
> > > Hi!
> > >
> > > > This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 5.10.171 release.
> > > > There are 19 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.
> > >
> > > AFAICT we should not need this patch -- we don't have b5fc29233d28 in
> > > 5.10, so the assertion seems to be at the correct place here.
> >
> > This (b5fc29233d28be7a3322848ebe73ac327559cdb9) appears to be in linux-5.10.y,
> > though?
> > https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/stable/linux.git/commit/?h=linux-5.10.y&id=b5fc29233d28be7a3322848ebe73ac327559cdb9
> >
> > Confused,
> > -- Slade
> >
>
> Also confused. My script tells me that it is _not_ in v5.10.y, and that it isn't
> queued either.
>
> Upstream commit b5fc29233d2 ("inet6: Remove inet6_destroy_sock() in sk->sk_prot->destroy().")
> Integrated in v6.2-rc1
> Not in 6.1.y
> Not in 5.15.y
> Not in 5.10.y
> Not in 5.4.y
> Not in 4.19.y
> Not in 4.14.y
>
> and:
>
> $ git describe --contains b5fc29233d28be7a3322848ebe73ac327559cdb9
> v6.2-rc1~99^2~393^2~4
>
> However, it looks like 62ec33b44e0 is queued everywhere.
>
> Upstream commit 62ec33b44e0 ("net: Remove WARN_ON_ONCE(sk->sk_forward_alloc) from sk_stream_kill_queues().")
> Integrated in v6.2
> Expected to be fixed in 6.1.y with next stable release (sha 29d108dc216d)
> Expected to be fixed in 5.15.y with next stable release (sha 07c26a42efc3)
> Expected to be fixed in 5.10.y with next stable release (sha 3ecdc3798eb9)
> Expected to be fixed in 5.4.y with next stable release (sha a88c26a1210e)
> Expected to be fixed in 4.19.y with next stable release (sha 60b390c291e9)
> Expected to be fixed in 4.14.y with next stable release (sha b53a2b4858c2)
Please see the email from Kuniyuki here:
https://lore.kernel.org/r/[email protected]
that should explain this.
The backport to older kernels is here:
https://lore.kernel.org/r/[email protected]
If you all think this should not be in any of these kernels, please let
work with Kuniyuki to figure it out.
thanks,
greg k-h
Hi Greg,
On Wed, Mar 01, 2023 at 07:08:29PM +0100, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 5.10.171 release.
> There are 19 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 Fri, 03 Mar 2023 18:06:43 +0000.
> Anything received after that time might be too late.
Build test (gcc version 11.3.1 20230210):
mips: 63 configs -> no failure
arm: 104 configs -> no failure
arm64: 3 configs -> no failure
x86_64: 4 configs -> no failure
alpha allmodconfig -> no failure
powerpc allmodconfig -> no failure
riscv allmodconfig -> no failure
s390 allmodconfig -> no failure
xtensa allmodconfig -> no failure
Boot test:
x86_64: Booted on my test laptop. No regression.
x86_64: Booted on qemu. No regression. [1]
arm64: Booted on rpi4b (4GB model). No regression. [2]
[1]. https://openqa.qa.codethink.co.uk/tests/2977
[2]. https://openqa.qa.codethink.co.uk/tests/2978
Tested-by: Sudip Mukherjee <[email protected]>
--
Regards
Sudip
On Wed, 1 Mar 2023 at 23:40, Greg Kroah-Hartman
<[email protected]> wrote:
>
> This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 5.10.171 release.
> There are 19 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 Fri, 03 Mar 2023 18:06:43 +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-5.10.171-rc1.gz
> or in the git tree and branch at:
> git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/stable/linux-stable-rc.git linux-5.10.y
> and the diffstat can be found below.
>
> thanks,
>
> greg k-h
Results from Linaro’s test farm.
No regressions on arm64, arm, x86_64, and i386.
Tested-by: Linux Kernel Functional Testing <[email protected]>
## Build
* kernel: 5.10.171-rc1
* git: https://gitlab.com/Linaro/lkft/mirrors/stable/linux-stable-rc
* git branch: linux-5.10.y
* git commit: 032c569d266c83563696ed018f5679bf7b5afe45
* git describe: v5.10.170-20-g032c569d266c
* test details:
https://qa-reports.linaro.org/lkft/linux-stable-rc-linux-5.10.y/build/v5.10.170-20-g032c569d266c
## Test Regressions (compared to v5.10.170)
## Metric Regressions (compared to v5.10.170)
## Test Fixes (compared to v5.10.170)
## Metric Fixes (compared to v5.10.170)
## Test result summary
total: 134470, pass: 112238, fail: 3614, skip: 18316, xfail: 302
## Build Summary
* arc: 5 total, 5 passed, 0 failed
* arm: 112 total, 111 passed, 1 failed
* arm64: 39 total, 37 passed, 2 failed
* i386: 30 total, 28 passed, 2 failed
* mips: 24 total, 24 passed, 0 failed
* parisc: 6 total, 6 passed, 0 failed
* powerpc: 23 total, 18 passed, 5 failed
* riscv: 9 total, 9 passed, 0 failed
* s390: 9 total, 9 passed, 0 failed
* sh: 12 total, 12 passed, 0 failed
* sparc: 6 total, 6 passed, 0 failed
* x86_64: 33 total, 31 passed, 2 failed
## Test suites summary
* boot
* fwts
* igt-gpu-tools
* kselftest-android
* kselftest-arm64
* kselftest-breakpoints
* kselftest-capabilities
* kselftest-cgroup
* kselftest-clone3
* kselftest-core
* kselftest-cpu-hotplug
* kselftest-cpufreq
* kselftest-drivers-dma-buf
* kselftest-efivarfs
* kselftest-filesystems
* kselftest-filesystems-binderfs
* kselftest-firmware
* kselftest-fpu
* kselftest-ftrace
* kselftest-futex
* kselftest-gpio
* kselftest-intel_pstate
* kselftest-ipc
* kselftest-ir
* kselftest-kcmp
* kselftest-kexec
* kselftest-kvm
* kselftest-lib
* kselftest-livepatch
* kselftest-membarrier
* kselftest-memfd
* kselftest-memory-hotplug
* kselftest-mincore
* kselftest-mount
* kselftest-mqueue
* kselftest-net
* kselftest-net-forwarding
* kselftest-net-mptcp
* kselftest-netfilter
* kselftest-nsfs
* kselftest-openat2
* kselftest-pid_namespace
* kselftest-pidfd
* kselftest-proc
* kselftest-pstore
* kselftest-ptrace
* kselftest-rseq
* kselftest-rtc
* kselftest-seccomp
* kselftest-tc-testing
* kselftest-timens
* kselftest-timers
* kselftest-tmpfs
* kselftest-tpm2
* kselftest-user
* kselftest-vm
* kselftest-x86
* kselftest-zram
* kunit
* kvm-unit-tests
* libgpiod
* libhugetlbfs
* log-parser-boot
* log-parser-test
* ltp-cap_bounds
* ltp-commands
* ltp-containers
* ltp-controllers
* ltp-cpuhotplug
* ltp-crypto
* ltp-cve
* ltp-dio
* ltp-fcntl-locktests
* ltp-filecaps
* ltp-fs
* ltp-fs_bind
* ltp-fs_perms_simple
* ltp-fsx
* ltp-hugetlb
* ltp-io
* ltp-ipc
* ltp-math
* ltp-mm
* ltp-nptl
* ltp-open-posix-tests
* ltp-pty
* ltp-sched
* ltp-securebits
* ltp-smoke
* ltp-syscalls
* ltp-tracing
* network-basic-tests
* packetdrill
* perf
* rcutorture
* v4l2-compliance
* vdso
--
Linaro LKFT
https://lkft.linaro.org
On Wed, Mar 01, 2023 at 07:08:29PM +0100, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 5.10.171 release.
> There are 19 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 Fri, 03 Mar 2023 18:06:43 +0000.
> Anything received after that time might be too late.
>
Build results:
total: 162 pass: 162 fail: 0
Qemu test results:
total: 478 pass: 478 fail: 0
Tested-by: Guenter Roeck <[email protected]>
Guenter