Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5.10 000/122] 5.10.68-rc1 review
From:   Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@gmail.com>
To:     Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Cc:     torvalds@linux-foundation.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org,
        linux@roeck-us.net, shuah@kernel.org, patches@kernelci.org,
        lkft-triage@lists.linaro.org, pavel@denx.de, jonathanh@nvidia.com,
        stable@vger.kernel.org
References: <20210920163915.757887582@linuxfoundation.org>
 <87001227-a271-e9bb-38bc-059279caaf3b@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <513b55c6-0f1f-4a84-65b7-fd05e99c0bcb@gmail.com>
Date:   Mon, 20 Sep 2021 12:00:39 -0700
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/78.13.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <87001227-a271-e9bb-38bc-059279caaf3b@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: bulk

On 9/20/21 11:39 AM, Florian Fainelli wrote:
> On 9/20/21 9:42 AM, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
>> This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 5.10.68 release.
>> There are 122 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 Wed, 22 Sep 2021 16:38:49 +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-5.10.68-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:
> 
> Tested-by: Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@gmail.com>
> 

Sorry taking that back, the merge did not really happen so I was not
testing 5.10.68 but 5.10.67, see my other comment about one of the
patches causing a regression, thanks!
-- 
Florian