Skip to contentSkip to conversation

5.19.8-rc1 review

PATCH In review Greg Kroah-Hartman 13 participants 168 messages Sep 6, 2022 – Sep 8, 2022 Page 2 of 2

Subsystems (3)
lore
Share & tools
lore
author maintainer
#156 lore raw

PATCH 155/155 tty: n_gsm: avoid call of sleeping functions from atomic context

In reply to Greg Kroah-Hartman

From: Fedor Pchelkin <[email protected]>

commit 902e02ea9385373ce4b142576eef41c642703955 upstream.

Syzkaller reports the following problem:

BUG: sleeping function called from invalid context at kernel/printk/printk.c:2347

in_atomic(): 1, irqs_disabled(): 1, non_block: 0, pid: 1105, name: syz-executor423
3 locks held by syz-executor423/1105:
#0: ffff8881468b9098 (&tty->ldisc_sem){++++}-{0:0}, at: tty_ldisc_ref_wait+0x22/0x90 drivers/tty/tty_ldisc.c:266 #1: ffff8881468b9130 (&tty->atomic_write_lock){+.+.}-{3:3}, at: tty_write_lock drivers/tty/tty_io.c:952 [inline] #1: ffff8881468b9130 (&tty->atomic_write_lock){+.+.}-{3:3}, at: do_tty_write drivers/tty/tty_io.c:975 [inline] #1: ffff8881468b9130 (&tty->atomic_write_lock){+.+.}-{3:3}, at: file_tty_write.constprop.0+0x2a8/0x8e0 drivers/tty/tty_io.c:1118 #2: ffff88801b06c398 (&gsm->tx_lock){....}-{2:2}, at: gsmld_write+0x5e/0x150 drivers/tty/n_gsm.c:2717

irq event stamp: 3482
hardirqs last  enabled at (3481): [<ffffffff81d13343>] __get_reqs_available+0x143/0x2f0 fs/aio.c:946
hardirqs last disabled at (3482): [<ffffffff87d39722>] __raw_spin_lock_irqsave include/linux/spinlock_api_smp.h:108 [inline]
hardirqs last disabled at (3482): [<ffffffff87d39722>] _raw_spin_lock_irqsave+0x52/0x60 kernel/locking/spinlock.c:159
softirqs last  enabled at (3408): [<ffffffff87e01002>] asm_call_irq_on_stack+0x12/0x20
softirqs last disabled at (3401): [<ffffffff87e01002>] asm_call_irq_on_stack+0x12/0x20
Preemption disabled at:
[<0000000000000000>] 0x0
CPU: 2 PID: 1105 Comm: syz-executor423 Not tainted 5.10.137-syzkaller #0
Hardware name: QEMU Standard PC (i440FX + PIIX, 1996), BIOS 1.12.0-1 04/01/2014
Call Trace:
 __dump_stack lib/dump_stack.c:77 [inline]
 dump_stack+0x107/0x167 lib/dump_stack.c:118
 ___might_sleep.cold+0x1e8/0x22e kernel/sched/core.c:7304
 console_lock+0x19/0x80 kernel/printk/printk.c:2347
 do_con_write+0x113/0x1de0 drivers/tty/vt/vt.c:2909
 con_write+0x22/0xc0 drivers/tty/vt/vt.c:3296
 gsmld_write+0xd0/0x150 drivers/tty/n_gsm.c:2720
 do_tty_write drivers/tty/tty_io.c:1028 [inline]
 file_tty_write.constprop.0+0x502/0x8e0 drivers/tty/tty_io.c:1118
 call_write_iter include/linux/fs.h:1903 [inline]
 aio_write+0x355/0x7b0 fs/aio.c:1580
 __io_submit_one fs/aio.c:1952 [inline]
 io_submit_one+0xf45/0x1a90 fs/aio.c:1999
 __do_sys_io_submit fs/aio.c:2058 [inline]
 __se_sys_io_submit fs/aio.c:2028 [inline]
 __x64_sys_io_submit+0x18c/0x2f0 fs/aio.c:2028
 do_syscall_64+0x33/0x40 arch/x86/entry/common.c:46
 entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x61/0xc6

The problem happens in the following control flow:

gsmld_write(...)
spin_lock_irqsave(&gsm->tx_lock, flags) // taken a spinlock on TX data
con_write(...)
do_con_write(...)
console_lock()

    might_sleep() // -> bug

As far as console_lock() might sleep it should not be called with spinlock held.

The patch replaces tx_lock spinlock with mutex in order to avoid the problem.

Found by Linux Verification Center (linuxtesting.org) with Syzkaller.

---
 drivers/tty/n_gsm.c |   53 +++++++++++++++++++++++-----------------------------
 1 file changed, 24 insertions(+), 29 deletions(-)
drivers/tty/n_gsm.c +24 -29
@@ -248,7 +248,7 @@ struct gsm_mux {
 	bool constipated;		/* Asked by remote to shut up */
 	bool has_devices;		/* Devices were registered */
 
-	spinlock_t tx_lock;
+	struct mutex tx_mutex;
 	unsigned int tx_bytes;		/* TX data outstanding */
 #define TX_THRESH_HI		8192
 #define TX_THRESH_LO		2048
@@ -680,7 +680,6 @@ static int gsm_send(struct gsm_mux *gsm,
 	struct gsm_msg *msg;
 	u8 *dp;
 	int ocr;
-	unsigned long flags;
 
 	msg = gsm_data_alloc(gsm, addr, 0, control);
 	if (!msg)
@@ -702,10 +701,10 @@ static int gsm_send(struct gsm_mux *gsm,
 
 	gsm_print_packet("Q->", addr, cr, control, NULL, 0);
 
-	spin_lock_irqsave(&gsm->tx_lock, flags);
+	mutex_lock(&gsm->tx_mutex);
 	list_add_tail(&msg->list, &gsm->tx_ctrl_list);
 	gsm->tx_bytes += msg->len;
-	spin_unlock_irqrestore(&gsm->tx_lock, flags);
+	mutex_unlock(&gsm->tx_mutex);
 	gsmld_write_trigger(gsm);
 
 	return 0;
@@ -730,7 +729,7 @@ static void gsm_dlci_clear_queues(struct
 	spin_unlock_irqrestore(&dlci->lock, flags);
 
 	/* Clear data packets in MUX write queue */
-	spin_lock_irqsave(&gsm->tx_lock, flags);
+	mutex_lock(&gsm->tx_mutex);
 	list_for_each_entry_safe(msg, nmsg, &gsm->tx_data_list, list) {
 		if (msg->addr != addr)
 			continue;
@@ -738,7 +737,7 @@ static void gsm_dlci_clear_queues(struct
 		list_del(&msg->list);
 		kfree(msg);
 	}
-	spin_unlock_irqrestore(&gsm->tx_lock, flags);
+	mutex_unlock(&gsm->tx_mutex);
 }
 
 /**
@@ -1024,10 +1023,9 @@ static void __gsm_data_queue(struct gsm_
 
 static void gsm_data_queue(struct gsm_dlci *dlci, struct gsm_msg *msg)
 {
-	unsigned long flags;
-	spin_lock_irqsave(&dlci->gsm->tx_lock, flags);
+	mutex_lock(&dlci->gsm->tx_mutex);
 	__gsm_data_queue(dlci, msg);
-	spin_unlock_irqrestore(&dlci->gsm->tx_lock, flags);
+	mutex_unlock(&dlci->gsm->tx_mutex);
 }
 
 /**
@@ -1039,7 +1037,7 @@ static void gsm_data_queue(struct gsm_dl
  *	is data. Keep to the MRU of the mux. This path handles the usual tty
  *	interface which is a byte stream with optional modem data.
  *
- *	Caller must hold the tx_lock of the mux.
+ *	Caller must hold the tx_mutex of the mux.
  */
 
 static int gsm_dlci_data_output(struct gsm_mux *gsm, struct gsm_dlci *dlci)
@@ -1099,7 +1097,7 @@ static int gsm_dlci_data_output(struct g
  *	is data. Keep to the MRU of the mux. This path handles framed data
  *	queued as skbuffs to the DLCI.
  *
- *	Caller must hold the tx_lock of the mux.
+ *	Caller must hold the tx_mutex of the mux.
  */
 
 static int gsm_dlci_data_output_framed(struct gsm_mux *gsm,
@@ -1115,7 +1113,7 @@ static int gsm_dlci_data_output_framed(s
 	if (dlci->adaption == 4)
 		overhead = 1;
 
-	/* dlci->skb is locked by tx_lock */
+	/* dlci->skb is locked by tx_mutex */
 	if (dlci->skb == NULL) {
 		dlci->skb = skb_dequeue_tail(&dlci->skb_list);
 		if (dlci->skb == NULL)
@@ -1169,7 +1167,7 @@ static int gsm_dlci_data_output_framed(s
  *	Push an empty frame in to the transmit queue to update the modem status
  *	bits and to transmit an optional break.
  *
- *	Caller must hold the tx_lock of the mux.
+ *	Caller must hold the tx_mutex of the mux.
  */
 
 static int gsm_dlci_modem_output(struct gsm_mux *gsm, struct gsm_dlci *dlci,
@@ -1283,13 +1281,12 @@ static int gsm_dlci_data_sweep(struct gs
 
 static void gsm_dlci_data_kick(struct gsm_dlci *dlci)
 {
-	unsigned long flags;
 	int sweep;
 
 	if (dlci->constipated)
 		return;
 
-	spin_lock_irqsave(&dlci->gsm->tx_lock, flags);
+	mutex_lock(&dlci->gsm->tx_mutex);
 	/* If we have nothing running then we need to fire up */
 	sweep = (dlci->gsm->tx_bytes < TX_THRESH_LO);
 	if (dlci->gsm->tx_bytes == 0) {
@@ -1300,7 +1297,7 @@ static void gsm_dlci_data_kick(struct gs
 	}
 	if (sweep)
 		gsm_dlci_data_sweep(dlci->gsm);
-	spin_unlock_irqrestore(&dlci->gsm->tx_lock, flags);
+	mutex_unlock(&dlci->gsm->tx_mutex);
 }
 
 /*
@@ -1994,14 +1991,13 @@ static void gsm_dlci_command(struct gsm_
 static void gsm_kick_timeout(struct work_struct *work)
 {
 	struct gsm_mux *gsm = container_of(work, struct gsm_mux, kick_timeout.work);
-	unsigned long flags;
 	int sent = 0;
 
-	spin_lock_irqsave(&gsm->tx_lock, flags);
+	mutex_lock(&gsm->tx_mutex);
 	/* If we have nothing running then we need to fire up */
 	if (gsm->tx_bytes < TX_THRESH_LO)
 		sent = gsm_dlci_data_sweep(gsm);
-	spin_unlock_irqrestore(&gsm->tx_lock, flags);
+	mutex_unlock(&gsm->tx_mutex);
 
 	if (sent && debug & 4)
 		pr_info("%s TX queue stalled\n", __func__);
@@ -2531,6 +2527,7 @@ static void gsm_free_mux(struct gsm_mux
 			break;
 		}
 	}
+	mutex_destroy(&gsm->tx_mutex);
 	mutex_destroy(&gsm->mutex);
 	kfree(gsm->txframe);
 	kfree(gsm->buf);
@@ -2602,6 +2599,7 @@ static struct gsm_mux *gsm_alloc_mux(voi
 	}
 	spin_lock_init(&gsm->lock);
 	mutex_init(&gsm->mutex);
+	mutex_init(&gsm->tx_mutex);
 	kref_init(&gsm->ref);
 	INIT_LIST_HEAD(&gsm->tx_ctrl_list);
 	INIT_LIST_HEAD(&gsm->tx_data_list);
@@ -2610,7 +2608,6 @@ static struct gsm_mux *gsm_alloc_mux(voi
 	INIT_WORK(&gsm->tx_work, gsmld_write_task);
 	init_waitqueue_head(&gsm->event);
 	spin_lock_init(&gsm->control_lock);
-	spin_lock_init(&gsm->tx_lock);
 
 	gsm->t1 = T1;
 	gsm->t2 = T2;
@@ -2635,6 +2632,7 @@ static struct gsm_mux *gsm_alloc_mux(voi
 	}
 	spin_unlock(&gsm_mux_lock);
 	if (i == MAX_MUX) {
+		mutex_destroy(&gsm->tx_mutex);
 		mutex_destroy(&gsm->mutex);
 		kfree(gsm->txframe);
 		kfree(gsm->buf);
@@ -2790,17 +2788,16 @@ static void gsmld_write_trigger(struct g
 static void gsmld_write_task(struct work_struct *work)
 {
 	struct gsm_mux *gsm = container_of(work, struct gsm_mux, tx_work);
-	unsigned long flags;
 	int i, ret;
 
 	/* All outstanding control channel and control messages and one data
 	 * frame is sent.
 	 */
 	ret = -ENODEV;
-	spin_lock_irqsave(&gsm->tx_lock, flags);
+	mutex_lock(&gsm->tx_mutex);
 	if (gsm->tty)
 		ret = gsm_data_kick(gsm);
-	spin_unlock_irqrestore(&gsm->tx_lock, flags);
+	mutex_unlock(&gsm->tx_mutex);
 
 	if (ret >= 0)
 		for (i = 0; i < NUM_DLCI; i++)
@@ -3008,7 +3005,6 @@ static ssize_t gsmld_write(struct tty_st
 			   const unsigned char *buf, size_t nr)
 {
 	struct gsm_mux *gsm = tty->disc_data;
-	unsigned long flags;
 	int space;
 	int ret;
 
@@ -3016,13 +3012,13 @@ static ssize_t gsmld_write(struct tty_st
 		return -ENODEV;
 
 	ret = -ENOBUFS;
-	spin_lock_irqsave(&gsm->tx_lock, flags);
+	mutex_lock(&gsm->tx_mutex);
 	space = tty_write_room(tty);
 	if (space >= nr)
 		ret = tty->ops->write(tty, buf, nr);
 	else
 		set_bit(TTY_DO_WRITE_WAKEUP, &tty->flags);
-	spin_unlock_irqrestore(&gsm->tx_lock, flags);
+	mutex_unlock(&gsm->tx_mutex);
 
 	return ret;
 }
@@ -3319,14 +3315,13 @@ static struct tty_ldisc_ops tty_ldisc_pa
 static void gsm_modem_upd_via_data(struct gsm_dlci *dlci, u8 brk)
 {
 	struct gsm_mux *gsm = dlci->gsm;
-	unsigned long flags;
 
 	if (dlci->state != DLCI_OPEN || dlci->adaption != 2)
 		return;
 
-	spin_lock_irqsave(&gsm->tx_lock, flags);
+	mutex_lock(&gsm->tx_mutex);
 	gsm_dlci_modem_output(gsm, dlci, brk);
-	spin_unlock_irqrestore(&gsm->tx_lock, flags);
+	mutex_unlock(&gsm->tx_mutex);
 }
 
 /**
Tested-by Linux Kernel Functional Testing on the v1 series
#157 lore raw
In reply to Greg Kroah-Hartman
Quoted 10 lines · Greg Kroah-Hartman

This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 5.19.8 release. There are 155 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 Thu, 08 Sep 2022 13:27:58 +0000. Anything received after that time might be too late.

The whole patch series can be found in one patch at:

Quoted 8 lines
        https://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/v5.x/stable-review/patch-5.19.8-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-5.19.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.

## Build
* kernel: 5.19.8-rc1
* git: https://gitlab.com/Linaro/lkft/mirrors/stable/linux-stable-rc
* git branch: linux-5.19.y
* git commit: c0790038d4859e77589313023c61b0d7104e2d14
* git describe: v5.19.4-390-gc0790038d485
* test details:
https://qa-reports.linaro.org/lkft/linux-stable-rc-linux-5.19.y/build/v5.19.4-390-gc0790038d485

## No test Regressions (compared to v5.19.4-234-gdd6b2254d7a7)

## No metric Regressions (compared to v5.19.4-234-gdd6b2254d7a7)

## No test Fixes (compared to v5.19.4-234-gdd6b2254d7a7)

## No metric Fixes (compared to v5.19.4-234-gdd6b2254d7a7)

## Test result summary
total: 103723, pass: 93459, fail: 693, skip: 9312, xfail: 259

## Build Summary
* arc: 10 total, 10 passed, 0 failed
* arm: 333 total, 333 passed, 0 failed
* arm64: 65 total, 63 passed, 2 failed
* i386: 55 total, 53 passed, 2 failed
* mips: 56 total, 56 passed, 0 failed
* parisc: 12 total, 12 passed, 0 failed
* powerpc: 69 total, 63 passed, 6 failed
* riscv: 27 total, 22 passed, 5 failed
* s390: 21 total, 21 passed, 0 failed
* sh: 24 total, 24 passed, 0 failed
* sparc: 12 total, 12 passed, 0 failed
* x86_64: 58 total, 56 passed, 2 failed

## Test suites summary
* fwts
* igt-gpu-tools
* 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
* rcutorture
* v4l2-compliance
* vdso

--
Linaro LKFT
https://lkft.linaro.org

Tested-by on the v1 series
#158 lore raw
In reply to Greg Kroah-Hartman
Quoted 9 lines · Greg Kroah-Hartman

This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 5.19.8 release. There are 155 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 Thu, 08 Sep 2022 13:27:58 +0000. Anything received after that time might be too late.

The whole patch series can be found in one patch at:

Quoted 8 lines
	https://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/v5.x/stable-review/patch-5.19.8-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-5.19.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:

Signature · 1 line
Florian
Tested-by on the v1 series
#159 lore raw
In reply to Greg Kroah-Hartman
Quoted 9 lines · Greg Kroah-Hartman

This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 5.19.8 release. There are 155 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 Thu, 08 Sep 2022 13:27:58 +0000. Anything received after that time might be too late.

The whole patch series can be found in one patch at:

Quoted 9 lines
	https://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/v5.x/stable-review/patch-5.19.8-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-5.19.y
and the diffstat can be found below.

thanks,

greg k-h

Compiled and booted on my test system. No dmesg regressions.

thanks,
-- Shuah

Tested-by on the v1 series
#160 lore raw
In reply to Greg Kroah-Hartman
Quoted 10 lines · Greg Kroah-Hartman

This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 5.19.8 release. There are 155 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 Thu, 08 Sep 2022 13:27:58 +0000. Anything received after that time might be too late.

The whole patch series can be found in one patch at:

Quoted 8 lines
        https://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/v5.x/stable-review/patch-5.19.8-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-5.19.y
and the diffstat can be found below.

thanks,

greg k-h

Hi Greg,

Compiled and booted on my test system Lenovo P50s: Intel Core i7 No emergency and critical messages in the dmesg

./perf bench sched all
# Running sched/messaging benchmark...
# 20 sender and receiver processes per group
# 10 groups == 400 processes run

     Total time: 0.808 [sec]

# Running sched/pipe benchmark...
# Executed 1000000 pipe operations between two processes

     Total time: 9.461 [sec]

       9.461262 usecs/op
         105694 ops/sec

Thanks
-Zan

Tested-by on the v1 series
#161 lore raw
In reply to Greg Kroah-Hartman
Quoted 9 lines · Greg Kroah-Hartman

This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 5.19.8 release. There are 155 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 Thu, 08 Sep 2022 13:27:58 +0000. Anything received after that time might be too late.

The whole patch series can be found in one patch at:

Quoted 8 lines
	https://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/v5.x/stable-review/patch-5.19.8-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-5.19.y
and the diffstat can be found below.

thanks,

greg k-h

Built and booted successfully on RISC-V RV64 (HiFive Unmatched).

Tested-by on the v1 series
#162 lore raw
In reply to Greg Kroah-Hartman
Quoted 8 lines · Greg Kroah-Hartman

This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 5.19.8 release. There are 155 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 Thu, 08 Sep 2022 13:27:58 +0000. Anything received after that time might be too late.

Build results:

	total: 150 pass: 150 fail: 0
Qemu test results:
	total: 490 pass: 490 fail: 0

Guenter

Tested-by Sudip Mukherjee on the v1 series
#164 lore raw
In reply to Greg Kroah-Hartman

Hi Greg,

Quoted 7 lines · Greg Kroah-Hartman

This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 5.19.8 release. There are 155 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 Thu, 08 Sep 2022 13:27:58 +0000. Anything received after that time might be too late.

Build test (gcc version 12.2.1 20220819):
mips: 59 configs -> no failure
arm: 99 configs -> no failure
arm64: 3 configs -> no failure
x86_64: 4 configs -> no failure
alpha allmodconfig -> no failure
csky 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]
mips: Booted on ci20 board. No regression. [3]

[1]. https://openqa.qa.codethink.co.uk/tests/1781
[2]. https://openqa.qa.codethink.co.uk/tests/1786
[3]. https://openqa.qa.codethink.co.uk/tests/1788

--
Regards
Sudip

Tested-by on the v1 series
#165 lore raw
In reply to Greg Kroah-Hartman
Quoted 5 lines · Greg Kroah-Hartman

This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 5.19.8 release. There are 155 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.

Successfully cross-compiled for arm64 (bcm2711_defconfig, GCC 10.2.0) and powerpc (ps3_defconfig, GCC 12.1.0).

Signature · 1 line
An old man doll... just what I always wanted! - Clara
Tested-by on the v1 series
#166 lore raw
In reply to Greg Kroah-Hartman
Quoted 5 lines · Greg Kroah-Hartman

This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 5.19.8 release. There are 155 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.

Quoted 8 lines

Responses should be made by Thu, 08 Sep 2022 13:27:58 +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-5.19.8-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-5.19.y
and the diffstat can be found below.

openSUSE configs¹⁾ all green.

¹⁾ armv6hl armv7hl arm64 i386 ppc64 ppc64le riscv64 s390x x86_64

Signature · 3 lines
-- 
js
suse labs
Tested-by on the v1 series
#167 lore raw
In reply to Greg Kroah-Hartman
Quoted 7 lines · Greg Kroah-Hartman

This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 5.19.8 release. There are 155 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 Thu, 08 Sep 2022 13:27:58 +0000. Anything received after that time might be too late.

Hi Greg,

5.19.8-rc1 tested.

Run tested on:
- Intel Tiger Lake x86_64 (nuc11 i7-1165G7)

In addition - build tested for:
- Allwinner A64
- Allwinner H3
- Allwinner H5
- Allwinner H6
- NXP iMX6
- NXP iMX8
- Qualcomm Dragonboard
- Rockchip RK3288
- Rockchip RK3328
- Rockchip RK3399pro
- Samsung Exynos5422

--
Rudi