Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Date:   Sat, 20 Aug 2022 11:03:31 +0100
From:   "Sudip Mukherjee (Codethink)" <sudipm.mukherjee@gmail.com>
To:     Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
Cc:     linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, stable@vger.kernel.org,
        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,
        f.fainelli@gmail.com, slade@sladewatkins.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5.18 0/6] 5.18.19-rc1 review
Message-ID: <YwCxc5gwpmGRBUL1@debian>
References: <20220819153710.430046927@linuxfoundation.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20220819153710.430046927@linuxfoundation.org>
Precedence: bulk

Hi Greg,

On Fri, Aug 19, 2022 at 05:40:12PM +0200, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> -------------------
> NOTE, this is the LAST 5.18.y stable release.  This tree will be
> end-of-life after this one.  Please move to 5.19.y at this point in time
> or let us know why that is not possible.
> -------------------
> 
> This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 5.18.19 release.
> There are 6 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 Sun, 21 Aug 2022 15:36:59 +0000.
> Anything received after that time might be too late.

Build test (gcc version 12.2.1 20220819):
mips: 59 configs -> 1 failure
arm: 99 configs -> no failure
arm64: 3 configs -> no failure
x86_64: 4 configs -> no failure
alpha allmodconfig -> no failure
csky allmodconfig -> fails
powerpc allmodconfig -> fais
riscv allmodconfig -> no failure
s390 allmodconfig -> no failure
xtensa allmodconfig -> no failure

Note:
csky and mips allmodconfig fails with gcc-12, passes with gcc-11.
Already reported for mainline.

powerpc failure is not seen in mainline. Same error as csky and mips.

In function 'memcmp',
    inlined from 'bacmp' at ./include/net/bluetooth/bluetooth.h:302:9,
    inlined from 'l2cap_global_chan_by_psm' at net/bluetooth/l2cap_core.c:2002:15:
./include/linux/fortify-string.h:44:33: error: '__builtin_memcmp' specified bound 6 exceeds source size 0 [-Werror=stringop-overread]
   44 | #define __underlying_memcmp     __builtin_memcmp
      |                                 ^
./include/linux/fortify-string.h:404:16: note: in expansion of macro '__underlying_memcmp'
  404 |         return __underlying_memcmp(p, q, size);
      |                ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
In function 'memcmp',
    inlined from 'bacmp' at ./include/net/bluetooth/bluetooth.h:302:9,
    inlined from 'l2cap_global_chan_by_psm' at net/bluetooth/l2cap_core.c:2003:15:
./include/linux/fortify-string.h:44:33: error: '__builtin_memcmp' specified bound 6 exceeds source size 0 [-Werror=stringop-overread]
   44 | #define __underlying_memcmp     __builtin_memcmp
      |                                 ^
./include/linux/fortify-string.h:404:16: note: in expansion of macro '__underlying_memcmp'
  404 |         return __underlying_memcmp(p, q, size);
      |                ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

I am bisecting now to find out what caused it.

Boot test:
x86_64: Booted on my test laptop. No regression.
x86_64: Booted on qemu. No regression. [1]
mips: Booted on ci20 board. No regression. [2]

[1]. https://openqa.qa.codethink.co.uk/tests/1660
[2]. https://openqa.qa.codethink.co.uk/tests/1667

Tested-by: Sudip Mukherjee <sudip.mukherjee@codethink.co.uk>

--
Regards
Sudip