[PATCH 5.16 0/5] 5.16.9-rc1 review

[PATCH 5.16 0/5] 5.16.9-rc1 review

[Greg Kroah-Hartman]

This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 5.16.9 release.
There are 5 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 Fri, 11 Feb 2022 19:12:41 +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-5.16.9-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-5.16.y
and the diffstat can be found below.

thanks,

greg k-h

-------------
Pseudo-Shortlog of commits:

Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
    Linux 5.16.9-rc1

Herbert Xu <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au>
    crypto: api - Move cryptomgr soft dependency into algapi

Namjae Jeon <linkinjeon@kernel.org>
    ksmbd: fix SMB 3.11 posix extension mount failure

Janis Schoetterl-Glausch <scgl@linux.ibm.com>
    KVM: s390: Return error on SIDA memop on normal guest

Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
    moxart: fix potential use-after-free on remove path

Damien Le Moal <damien.lemoal@opensource.wdc.com>
    ata: libata-core: Fix ata_dev_config_cpr()


-------------

Diffstat:

 Makefile                      |  4 ++--
 arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c      |  2 ++
 crypto/algapi.c               |  1 +
 crypto/api.c                  |  1 -
 drivers/ata/libata-core.c     | 14 ++++++--------
 drivers/mmc/host/moxart-mmc.c |  2 +-
 fs/ksmbd/smb2pdu.c            |  2 +-
 include/linux/ata.h           |  2 +-
 8 files changed, 14 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)

[PATCH 5.16 1/5] ata: libata-core: Fix ata_dev_config_cpr()

[Greg Kroah-Hartman]

From: Damien Le Moal <damien.lemoal@opensource.wdc.com>

commit fda17afc6166e975bec1197bd94cd2a3317bce3f upstream.

The concurrent positioning ranges log page 47h is a general purpose log
page and not a subpage of the indentify device log. Using
ata_identify_page_supported() to test for concurrent positioning ranges
support is thus wrong. ata_log_supported() must be used.

Furthermore, unlike other advanced ATA features (e.g. NCQ priority),
accesses to the concurrent positioning ranges log page are not gated by
a feature bit from the device IDENTIFY data. Since many older drives
react badly to the READ LOG EXT and/or READ LOG DMA EXT commands isued
to read device log pages, avoid problems with older drives by limiting
the concurrent positioning ranges support detection to drives
implementing at least the ACS-4 ATA standard (major version 11). This
additional condition effectively turns ata_dev_config_cpr() into a nop
for older drives, avoiding problems in the field.

Fixes: fe22e1c2f705 ("libata: support concurrent positioning ranges log")
BugLink: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=215519
Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
Reviewed-by: Hannes Reinecke <hare@suse.de>
Tested-by: Abderraouf Adjal <adjal.arf@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Damien Le Moal <damien.lemoal@opensource.wdc.com>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
---
 drivers/ata/libata-core.c |   14 ++++++--------
 include/linux/ata.h       |    2 +-
 2 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)

--- a/drivers/ata/libata-core.c
+++ b/drivers/ata/libata-core.c
@@ -2486,23 +2486,21 @@ static void ata_dev_config_cpr(struct at
 	struct ata_cpr_log *cpr_log = NULL;
 	u8 *desc, *buf = NULL;
 
-	if (!ata_identify_page_supported(dev,
-				 ATA_LOG_CONCURRENT_POSITIONING_RANGES))
+	if (ata_id_major_version(dev->id) < 11 ||
+	    !ata_log_supported(dev, ATA_LOG_CONCURRENT_POSITIONING_RANGES))
 		goto out;
 
 	/*
-	 * Read IDENTIFY DEVICE data log, page 0x47
-	 * (concurrent positioning ranges). We can have at most 255 32B range
-	 * descriptors plus a 64B header.
+	 * Read the concurrent positioning ranges log (0x47). We can have at
+	 * most 255 32B range descriptors plus a 64B header.
 	 */
 	buf_len = (64 + 255 * 32 + 511) & ~511;
 	buf = kzalloc(buf_len, GFP_KERNEL);
 	if (!buf)
 		goto out;
 
-	err_mask = ata_read_log_page(dev, ATA_LOG_IDENTIFY_DEVICE,
-				     ATA_LOG_CONCURRENT_POSITIONING_RANGES,
-				     buf, buf_len >> 9);
+	err_mask = ata_read_log_page(dev, ATA_LOG_CONCURRENT_POSITIONING_RANGES,
+				     0, buf, buf_len >> 9);
 	if (err_mask)
 		goto out;
 
--- a/include/linux/ata.h
+++ b/include/linux/ata.h
@@ -324,12 +324,12 @@ enum {
 	ATA_LOG_NCQ_NON_DATA	= 0x12,
 	ATA_LOG_NCQ_SEND_RECV	= 0x13,
 	ATA_LOG_IDENTIFY_DEVICE	= 0x30,
+	ATA_LOG_CONCURRENT_POSITIONING_RANGES = 0x47,
 
 	/* Identify device log pages: */
 	ATA_LOG_SECURITY	  = 0x06,
 	ATA_LOG_SATA_SETTINGS	  = 0x08,
 	ATA_LOG_ZONED_INFORMATION = 0x09,
-	ATA_LOG_CONCURRENT_POSITIONING_RANGES = 0x47,
 
 	/* Identify device SATA settings log:*/
 	ATA_LOG_DEVSLP_OFFSET	  = 0x30,

[PATCH 5.16 2/5] moxart: fix potential use-after-free on remove path

[Greg Kroah-Hartman]

From: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>

commit bd2db32e7c3e35bd4d9b8bbff689434a50893546 upstream.

It was reported that the mmc host structure could be accessed after it
was freed in moxart_remove(), so fix this by saving the base register of
the device and using it instead of the pointer dereference.

Cc: Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@linaro.org>
Cc: Xiyu Yang <xiyuyang19@fudan.edu.cn>
Cc: Xin Xiong <xiongx18@fudan.edu.cn>
Cc: Xin Tan <tanxin.ctf@gmail.com>
Cc: Tony Lindgren <tony@atomide.com>
Cc: Yang Li <yang.lee@linux.alibaba.com>
Cc: linux-mmc@vger.kernel.org
Cc: stable <stable@vger.kernel.org>
Reported-by: whitehat002 <hackyzh002@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20220127071638.4057899-1-gregkh@linuxfoundation.org
Signed-off-by: Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@linaro.org>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
---
 drivers/mmc/host/moxart-mmc.c |    2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

--- a/drivers/mmc/host/moxart-mmc.c
+++ b/drivers/mmc/host/moxart-mmc.c
@@ -705,12 +705,12 @@ static int moxart_remove(struct platform
 	if (!IS_ERR_OR_NULL(host->dma_chan_rx))
 		dma_release_channel(host->dma_chan_rx);
 	mmc_remove_host(mmc);
-	mmc_free_host(mmc);
 
 	writel(0, host->base + REG_INTERRUPT_MASK);
 	writel(0, host->base + REG_POWER_CONTROL);
 	writel(readl(host->base + REG_CLOCK_CONTROL) | CLK_OFF,
 	       host->base + REG_CLOCK_CONTROL);
+	mmc_free_host(mmc);
 
 	return 0;
 }

[PATCH 5.16 3/5] KVM: s390: Return error on SIDA memop on normal guest

[Greg Kroah-Hartman]

From: Janis Schoetterl-Glausch <scgl@linux.ibm.com>

commit 2c212e1baedcd782b2535a3f86bc491977677c0e upstream.

Refuse SIDA memops on guests which are not protected.
For normal guests, the secure instruction data address designation,
which determines the location we access, is not under control of KVM.

Fixes: 19e122776886 (KVM: S390: protvirt: Introduce instruction data area bounce buffer)
Signed-off-by: Janis Schoetterl-Glausch <scgl@linux.ibm.com>
Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
Signed-off-by: Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@linux.ibm.com>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
---
 arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c |    2 ++
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)

--- a/arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c
+++ b/arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c
@@ -4711,6 +4711,8 @@ static long kvm_s390_guest_sida_op(struc
 		return -EINVAL;
 	if (mop->size + mop->sida_offset > sida_size(vcpu->arch.sie_block))
 		return -E2BIG;
+	if (!kvm_s390_pv_cpu_is_protected(vcpu))
+		return -EINVAL;
 
 	switch (mop->op) {
 	case KVM_S390_MEMOP_SIDA_READ:

[PATCH 5.16 4/5] ksmbd: fix SMB 3.11 posix extension mount failure

[Greg Kroah-Hartman]

From: Namjae Jeon <linkinjeon@kernel.org>

commit 9ca8581e79e51c57e60b3b8e3b89d816448f49fe upstream.

cifs client set 4 to DataLength of create_posix context, which mean
Mode variable of create_posix context is only available. So buffer
validation of ksmbd should check only the size of Mode except for
the size of Reserved variable.

Fixes: 8f77150c15f8 ("ksmbd: add buffer validation for SMB2_CREATE_CONTEXT")
Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org # v5.15+
Reported-by: Steve French <smfrench@gmail.com>
Tested-by: Steve French <stfrench@microsoft.com>
Signed-off-by: Namjae Jeon <linkinjeon@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Steve French <stfrench@microsoft.com>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
---
 fs/ksmbd/smb2pdu.c |    2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

--- a/fs/ksmbd/smb2pdu.c
+++ b/fs/ksmbd/smb2pdu.c
@@ -2688,7 +2688,7 @@ int smb2_open(struct ksmbd_work *work)
 					(struct create_posix *)context;
 				if (le16_to_cpu(context->DataOffset) +
 				    le32_to_cpu(context->DataLength) <
-				    sizeof(struct create_posix)) {
+				    sizeof(struct create_posix) - 4) {
 					rc = -EINVAL;
 					goto err_out1;
 				}

[PATCH 5.16 5/5] crypto: api - Move cryptomgr soft dependency into algapi

[Greg Kroah-Hartman]

From: Herbert Xu <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au>

commit c6ce9c5831cae515d375a01b97ae1778689acf19 upstream.

The soft dependency on cryptomgr is only needed in algapi because
if algapi isn't present then no algorithms can be loaded.  This
also fixes the case where api is built-in but algapi is built as
a module as the soft dependency would otherwise get lost.

Fixes: 8ab23d547f65 ("crypto: api - Add softdep on cryptomgr")
Reported-by: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@suse.com>
Signed-off-by: Herbert Xu <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au>
Tested-by: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@suse.com>
Signed-off-by: Herbert Xu <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
---
 crypto/algapi.c |    1 +
 crypto/api.c    |    1 -
 2 files changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

--- a/crypto/algapi.c
+++ b/crypto/algapi.c
@@ -1324,3 +1324,4 @@ module_exit(crypto_algapi_exit);
 
 MODULE_LICENSE("GPL");
 MODULE_DESCRIPTION("Cryptographic algorithms API");
+MODULE_SOFTDEP("pre: cryptomgr");
--- a/crypto/api.c
+++ b/crypto/api.c
@@ -643,4 +643,3 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(crypto_req_done);
 
 MODULE_DESCRIPTION("Cryptographic core API");
 MODULE_LICENSE("GPL");
-MODULE_SOFTDEP("pre: cryptomgr");

RE: [PATCH 5.16 0/5] 5.16.9-rc1 review

[Fox Chen]

On Wed,  9 Feb 2022 20:14:32 +0100, Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 5.16.9 release.
> There are 5 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 Fri, 11 Feb 2022 19:12:41 +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-5.16.9-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-5.16.y
> and the diffstat can be found below.
> 
> thanks,
> 
> greg k-h
> 

5.16.9-rc1 Successfully Compiled and booted on my Raspberry PI 4b (8g) (bcm2711)
                
Tested-by: Fox Chen <foxhlchen@gmail.com>

Re: [PATCH 5.16 0/5] 5.16.9-rc1 review

[Shuah Khan]

On 2/9/22 12:14 PM, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 5.16.9 release.
> There are 5 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 Fri, 11 Feb 2022 19:12:41 +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-5.16.9-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-5.16.y
> and the diffstat can be found below.
> 
> thanks,
> 
> greg k-h
> 

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

Tested-by: Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org>

thanks,
-- Shuah

Re: [PATCH 5.16 0/5] 5.16.9-rc1 review

[Naresh Kamboju]

On Thu, 10 Feb 2022 at 00:46, Greg Kroah-Hartman
<gregkh@linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
>
> This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 5.16.9 release.
> There are 5 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 Fri, 11 Feb 2022 19:12:41 +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-5.16.9-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-5.16.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.

Tested-by: Linux Kernel Functional Testing <lkft@linaro.org>

## Build
* kernel: 5.16.9-rc1
* git: https://gitlab.com/Linaro/lkft/mirrors/stable/linux-stable-rc
* git branch: linux-5.16.y
* git commit: ddf6ceb4eefb5985395eb6f289c2e63a46347273
* git describe: v5.16.7-134-gddf6ceb4eefb
* test details:
https://qa-reports.linaro.org/lkft/linux-stable-rc-linux-5.16.y/build/v5.16.7-134-gddf6ceb4eefb

## Test Regressions (compared to v5.16.7-128-g87d888a197db)
No test regressions found.

## Metric Regressions (compared to v5.16.7-128-g87d888a197db)
No metric regressions found.

## Test Fixes (compared to v5.16.7-128-g87d888a197db)
No test fixes found.

## Metric Fixes (compared to v5.16.7-128-g87d888a197db)
No metric fixes found.

## Test result summary
total: 86799, pass: 74577, fail: 996, skip: 10427, xfail: 799

## Build Summary
* arc: 10 total, 10 passed, 0 failed
* arm: 259 total, 259 passed, 0 failed
* arm64: 37 total, 37 passed, 0 failed
* i386: 35 total, 35 passed, 0 failed
* mips: 34 total, 34 passed, 0 failed
* parisc: 12 total, 12 passed, 0 failed
* powerpc: 52 total, 39 passed, 13 failed
* riscv: 24 total, 20 passed, 4 failed
* s390: 18 total, 18 passed, 0 failed
* sh: 24 total, 24 passed, 0 failed
* sparc: 12 total, 12 passed, 0 failed
* x86_64: 37 total, 37 passed, 0 failed

## Test suites summary
* fwts
* igt-gpu-tools
* kselftest-android
* kselftest-arm64
* kselftest-arm64/arm64.btitest.bti_c_func
* kselftest-arm64/arm64.btitest.bti_j_func
* kselftest-arm64/arm64.btitest.bti_jc_func
* kselftest-arm64/arm64.btitest.bti_none_func
* kselftest-arm64/arm64.btitest.nohint_func
* kselftest-arm64/arm64.btitest.paciasp_func
* kselftest-arm64/arm64.nobtitest.bti_c_func
* kselftest-arm64/arm64.nobtitest.bti_j_func
* kselftest-arm64/arm64.nobtitest.bti_jc_func
* kselftest-arm64/arm64.nobtitest.bti_none_func
* kselftest-arm64/arm64.nobtitest.nohint_func
* kselftest-arm64/arm64.nobtitest.paciasp_func
* kselftest-breakpoints
* kselftest-capabilities
* kselftest-cgroup
* kselftest-clone3
* kselftest-core
* kselftest-cpu-hotplug
* kselftest-cpufreq
* kselftest-drivers
* kselftest-efivarfs
* kselftest-filesystems
* kselftest-firmware
* kselftest-fpu
* kselftest-futex
* kselftest-gpio
* kselftest-intel_pstate
* kselftest-ipc
* kselftest-ir
* kselftest-kcmp
* kselftest-kvm
* kselftest-lib
* kselftest-livepatch
* kselftest-membarrier
* kselftest-openat2
* kselftest-pid_namespace
* kselftest-pidfd
* kselftest-proc
* kselftest-pstore
* kselftest-ptrace
* kselftest-rseq
* kselftest-rtc
* kselftest-seccomp
* kselftest-sigaltstack
* kselftest-size
* kselftest-splice
* kselftest-static_keys
* kselftest-sync
* kselftest-sysctl
* kselftest-timens
* kselftest-timers
* kselftest-tmpfs
* kselftest-tpm2
* kselftest-user
* kselftest-vm
* kselftest-x86
* kselftest-zram
* kunit
* kvm-unit-tests
* libgpiod
* libhugetlbfs
* linux-log-parser
* ltp-cap_bounds-tests
* ltp-commands-tests
* ltp-containers-tests
* ltp-controllers-tests
* ltp-cpuhotplug-tests
* ltp-crypto-tests
* ltp-cve-tests
* ltp-dio-tests
* ltp-fcntl-locktests-tests
* ltp-filecaps-tests
* ltp-fs-tests
* ltp-fs_bind-tests
* ltp-fs_perms_simple-tests
* ltp-fsx-tests
* ltp-hugetlb-tests
* ltp-io-tests
* ltp-ipc-tests
* ltp-math-tests
* ltp-mm-tests
* ltp-nptl-tests
* ltp-open-posix-tests
* ltp-pty-tests
* ltp-sched-tests
* ltp-securebits-tests
* ltp-syscalls-tests
* ltp-tracing-tests
* network-basic-tests
* packetdrill
* perf
* perf/Adding-1767d32e5a104d4d13d92babc85766d7-/tmp
* perf/Adding-3e9fe97d46b1851c50367e44548ebdcee7d00326-/tmp
* perf/Adding-8ff8eea75ef21d923271fda79d1afa39-/tmp
* perf/Adding-b39fb903844ca894205c5dc1a6402f77b152cfcb-/tmp
* perf/Adding-b49b8dec00f9591b476d003a6e367381-/tmp
* perf/Adding-c685cd66359fb80ad483b9c8e211a10b776cef29-/tmp
* perf/Zstd-perf.data-compression
* rcutorture
* ssuite
* v4l2-compliance

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

Re: [PATCH 5.16 0/5] 5.16.9-rc1 review

[Scott Bruce]

On 2/9/22 11:14, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 5.16.9 release.
> There are 5 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 Fri, 11 Feb 2022 19:12:41 +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-5.16.9-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-5.16.y
> and the diffstat can be found below.
> 
> thanks,
> 
> greg k-h
> 

Tested on x86-64/Cezanne: No regressions during Clang or GCC builds, in dmesg or during a dozen s0ix suspend cycles.

Tested-by: Scott Bruce <smbruce@gmail.com>

Re: [PATCH 5.16 0/5] 5.16.9-rc1 review

[Jeffrin Thalakkottoor]

On Thu, Feb 10, 2022 at 1:05 AM Greg Kroah-Hartman
<gregkh@linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
>
> This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 5.16.9 release.
> There are 5 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 Fri, 11 Feb 2022 19:12:41 +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-5.16.9-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-5.16.y
> and the diffstat can be found below.
>
> thanks,
>
> greg k-h
>

hello ,

Compiled  and booted 5.16.9-rc1+ on  VivoBook 15_ASUS Laptop X507UAR.
NO regressions  from  dmesg.

-- 
software engineer
rajagiri school of engineering and technology  -  autonomous

Re: [PATCH 5.16 0/5] 5.16.9-rc1 review

[Ron Economos]

On 2/9/22 11:14, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 5.16.9 release.
> There are 5 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 Fri, 11 Feb 2022 19:12:41 +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-5.16.9-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-5.16.y
> and the diffstat can be found below.
>
> thanks,
>
> greg k-h

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

Tested-by: Ron Economos <re@w6rz.net>

Re: [PATCH 5.16 0/5] 5.16.9-rc1 review

[Florian Fainelli]

On 2/9/2022 11:14 AM, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 5.16.9 release.
> There are 5 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 Fri, 11 Feb 2022 19:12:41 +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-5.16.9-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-5.16.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>
-- 
Florian

Re: [PATCH 5.16 0/5] 5.16.9-rc1 review

[Guenter Roeck]

On Wed, Feb 09, 2022 at 08:14:32PM +0100, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 5.16.9 release.
> There are 5 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 Fri, 11 Feb 2022 19:12:41 +0000.
> Anything received after that time might be too late.
> 

Build results:
	total: 155 pass: 155 fail: 0
Qemu test results:
	total: 488 pass: 488 fail: 0

Tested-by: Guenter Roeck <linux@roeck-us.net>

Guenter

Re: [PATCH 5.16 0/5] 5.16.9-rc1 review

[Slade Watkins]

On Wed, Feb 9, 2022, at 2:14 PM, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 5.16.9 release.
> There are 5 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 Fri, 11 Feb 2022 19:12:41 +0000.
> Anything received after that time might be too late.

Compiled and booted 5.16.9-rc1 on my x86_64 test system successfully without errors or regressions.

Tested-by: Slade Watkins <slade@sladewatkins.com>

Thanks,
Slade

Re: [PATCH 5.16 0/5] 5.16.9-rc1 review

[Bagas Sanjaya]

On 10/02/22 02.14, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 5.16.9 release.
> There are 5 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 11.2.0).

Tested-by: Bagas Sanjaya <bagasdotme@gmail.com>

-- 
An old man doll... just what I always wanted! - Clara

Re: [PATCH 5.16 0/5] 5.16.9-rc1 review

[Rudi Heitbaum]

On Wed, Feb 09, 2022 at 08:14:32PM +0100, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 5.16.9 release.
> There are 5 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 Fri, 11 Feb 2022 19:12:41 +0000.
> Anything received after that time might be too late.

Hi Greg,

5.16.9-rc1 tested.

Run tested on:
- Allwinner H6 (Tanix TX6)
- Intel Tiger Lake x86_64 (nuc11 i7-1165G7)

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

Tested-by: Rudi Heitbaum <rudi@heitbaum.com>
--
Rudi