Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-148574-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 2604:1380:45e3:2400::1 as permitted sender) client-ip=2604:1380:45e3:2400::1;
Date: Wed, 17 Apr 2024 15:28:04 +0200
From: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
To: Pavel Machek <pavel@denx.de>
Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org, patches@lists.linux.dev,
	linux-kernel@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,
	jonathanh@nvidia.com, f.fainelli@gmail.com,
	sudipm.mukherjee@gmail.com, srw@sladewatkins.net, rwarsow@gmx.de,
	conor@kernel.org, allen.lkml@gmail.com, broonie@kernel.org,
	alex.williamson@redhat.com, seanjc@google.com, jpoimboe@redhat.com,
	michael.roth@amd.com, dsterba@suse.com, aric.cyr@amd.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5.10 000/294] 5.10.215-rc1 review
Message-ID: <2024041739-faceted-sandpit-0818@gregkh>
References: <20240411095435.633465671@linuxfoundation.org>
 <Zh/HpAGFqa7YAFuM@duo.ucw.cz>
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <Zh/HpAGFqa7YAFuM@duo.ucw.cz>

On Wed, Apr 17, 2024 at 02:59:16PM +0200, Pavel Machek wrote:
> Hi!
> 
> > This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 5.10.215 release.
> > There are 294 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.
> 
> > Alex Williamson <alex.williamson@redhat.com>
> >     vfio/pci: Create persistent INTx handler
> 
> This introduces memory leak in vfio_intx_enable() -- name is not freed
> in case vdev->ctx = kzalloc() fails, for example.

So is the upstream commit wrong, or the backport wrong?

> > Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>
> >     x86/cpufeatures: Add CPUID_LNX_5 to track recently added Linux-defined word
> 
> AFAICT this is not needed in 5.10.

Why not?

> > Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@redhat.com>
> >     objtool: Add asm version of STACK_FRAME_NON_STANDARD
> 
> Asm version of this macro is not used in 5.10.

It fixed an issue.

> > Michael Roth <michael.roth@amd.com>
> >     x86/head/64: Re-enable stack protection
> 
> This is preparation for preparation for SEV-SNP CPUID patches, I don't
> believe we plan that for 6.1.

This is 5.10, not 6.1.

And are you sure that this is not needed?  Remember the x86 speculation
mess that is happening here.

> > David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com>
> >     btrfs: handle chunk tree lookup error in btrfs_relocate_sys_chunks()
> 
> (This applies to 4.19, too). mutex_unlock() is needed before "goto
> error" here.

So can you provide that fix please?

> > Aric Cyr <aric.cyr@amd.com>
> >     drm/amd/display: Fix nanosec stat overflow
> 
> (This applies to 4.19, too). This is wrong. It updates prototypes but
> not actual functions.

So should it be dropped or added to 4.19?

confused,

greg k-h