Received: by 10.192.165.148 with SMTP id m20csp4329909imm; Tue, 24 Apr 2018 00:28:17 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: AIpwx49ZqHlfRwHRDmvJtmaJUYAHqbpUTVDEUb0wPVCYbgQzn505hS8H8TZ9+/Go4eR3KiBb15dh X-Received: by 2002:a17:902:aa43:: with SMTP id c3-v6mr23980468plr.17.1524554897474; Tue, 24 Apr 2018 00:28:17 -0700 (PDT) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1524554897; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=Vac+BifdLPjg6yZHazXhneVDhltaMWFT1FvXiefIPAndWQv2I8VxkCe7wx9V0uwWTB gwNkRtgxJw+vwOSouP9dfyxwlLyYWpuIIZBOPLrAOP9lBTU5loCAQuYH/e7A6eSApmkT jR7PqXmy+wUpJ8aHOTMpFvO19HH9GW4UqdWzT3wjMIbrjVvtiuExK6yn1MF3jOVQQznO K0MW+bSvVzj6l71A/BYlAqHnuyX0uqiKAiT4+M2L8eiLUgxl3YQAoHNfh0SeKr4xqCng j86v7pP2558HnfHsC9fgUmKaDF5ndY0+VkhAWGyG4JlbpcWL7mMJv7nKjD1Bj1w2TCv9 FKRg== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:sender:user-agent:in-reply-to :content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:mime-version :references:message-id:subject:to:from:date :arc-authentication-results; bh=CaMcSGZGVXrrJ2MkwrQtGSMFlY4a6fQ6GAfcjDKF0lU=; b=ro47jBDyaEj+MM1TRHipiqvwS31g0JrunxRtp/Nnl8xKj9t+gIbKB1ilxvcvVvVGn9 exmJpU5zJq/SJrEND3e4yctXvD7m3n3MzQBEMcVSpXXQL/c+JQ3vVE8fsmfEc5nYpKu7 pKtlqVQ5f7vHSEO0/2NXk0RWoouKCKs5ZhspacOxw/+ntdZXWub0yNzj4ARv75s8T+37 kConKvnrEHKI4cS/d6oGhCg5NX0C2pVGJ4utGCNp9kmyeKT+prmzYq6+tjhQmYa00QwN MR5gRRkzwAaDJYk4+HGDin9wak4KK8I81sgSO7s0umfML0kAVO2Ehww6xtWVS38nixHG 7PhA== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [209.132.180.67]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id p23si10966408pgv.153.2018.04.24.00.28.02; Tue, 24 Apr 2018 00:28:17 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756455AbeDXH0v (ORCPT + 99 others); Tue, 24 Apr 2018 03:26:51 -0400 Received: from mail.linuxfoundation.org ([140.211.169.12]:39398 "EHLO mail.linuxfoundation.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756429AbeDXH0q (ORCPT ); Tue, 24 Apr 2018 03:26:46 -0400 Received: from localhost (LFbn-1-12247-202.w90-92.abo.wanadoo.fr [90.92.61.202]) by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id D9074480; Tue, 24 Apr 2018 07:26:45 +0000 (UTC) Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2018 09:26:35 +0200 From: Greg Kroah-Hartman To: Naresh Kamboju , open list , Shuah Khan , patches@kernelci.org, lkft-triage@lists.linaro.org, Ben Hutchings , linux- stable , Andrew Morton , Linus Torvalds , Guenter Roeck , tytso@mit.edu Subject: Re: [PATCH 4.9 00/95] 4.9.96-stable review Message-ID: <20180424072635.GD18419@kroah.com> References: <20180422135210.432103639@linuxfoundation.org> <20180423165750.GA27986@kroah.com> <20180423180137.GA26974@kroah.com> <20180423222553.lbxx3cwly2fbvabs@xps> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <20180423222553.lbxx3cwly2fbvabs@xps> User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.5 (2018-04-13) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Apr 23, 2018 at 05:25:53PM -0500, Dan Rue wrote: > On Mon, Apr 23, 2018 at 08:01:37PM +0200, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > > On Mon, Apr 23, 2018 at 06:57:50PM +0200, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > > > On Mon, Apr 23, 2018 at 10:23:49PM +0530, Naresh Kamboju wrote: > > > > On 22 April 2018 at 19:22, Greg Kroah-Hartman > > > > wrote: > > > > > This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 4.9.96 release. > > > > > There are 95 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 Apr 24 13:51:53 UTC 2018. > > > > > 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/v4.x/stable-review/patch-4.9.96-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-4.9.y > > > > > and the diffstat can be found below. > > > > > > > > > > thanks, > > > > > > > > > > greg k-h > > > > > > > > Regression detected on arm64 devices Hikey and Juno. > > > > > > > > Here is the list of bad commit patches to be reverted. > > > > git bisect found first bad commit as "3" > > > > but reverting 3 patch failed. > > > > so i have to revert all four patches and boot test and the boot PASS on hikey. > > > > > > > > 1) > > > > Theodore Ts'o > > > > random: add new ioctl RNDRESEEDCRNG > > > > 2) > > > > Theodore Ts'o > > > > random: crng_reseed() should lock the crng instance that it is modifying > > > > 3) > > > > Theodore Ts'o > > > > random: set up the NUMA crng instances after the CRNG is fully initialized > > > > > > This is the one I need to revert anyway. > > > > > > Let me see if I can just drop that one and do a -rc3. Give me a few > > > hours... > > > > Ok, I've dropped just patch 3 from 4.16.y, 4.14.y and 4.9.y and pushed > > out -rc3 versions of all of these. Let me know if that works or not for > > you. > > Results from Linaro’s test farm. > No regressions on arm64, arm and x86_64. Great! > I made a few comments inline regarding the reported failures. Also, as > this report is pushing 200 lines now with all of our tests and > environments (about 8*22 test runs), I'm planning on making some changes > in the next few weeks to make it more concise and useful. Any > suggestions or feature requests are most welcome. How about only reporting problems? Having tests "pass" is the norm and should always happen, right? That would make the reports smaller. thanks, greg k-h