From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0F43CC4332F for ; Tue, 15 Mar 2022 12:28:32 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1348159AbiCOM3l (ORCPT ); Tue, 15 Mar 2022 08:29:41 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:57592 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S235801AbiCOM3k (ORCPT ); Tue, 15 Mar 2022 08:29:40 -0400 Received: from ams.source.kernel.org (ams.source.kernel.org [IPv6:2604:1380:4601:e00::1]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4256410E2; Tue, 15 Mar 2022 05:28:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smtp.kernel.org (relay.kernel.org [52.25.139.140]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ams.source.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D2044B81604; Tue, 15 Mar 2022 12:28:26 +0000 (UTC) Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 6BE02C340EE; Tue, 15 Mar 2022 12:28:24 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=linuxfoundation.org; s=korg; t=1647347305; bh=Ye/ocCGoca+qFVAWeKWtxYvCf9/D8eC+LLNNN0SVF8I=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=dwoyEDyPlZeusu3XvRaZorYD9Ag4OSd+LxC8HFYTcS6xHRV3uXWCTtJVpMGRrnc8b hLVncT+SxCzFNgGXx7MzqxhUKU8GfVxdb6UrRw1b4EyjLgio8duvlSsZa4DW0PGGrF RkhmW/dO0qHS9rv0WBtCblD0NBOjCrt3XBcdbnJo= Date: Tue, 15 Mar 2022 13:28:21 +0100 From: Greg Kroah-Hartman To: James Morse Cc: Jon Hunter , 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, f.fainelli@gmail.com, sudipm.mukherjee@gmail.com, slade@sladewatkins.com, "linux-tegra@vger.kernel.org" Subject: Re: [PATCH 4.19 00/30] 4.19.235-rc1 review Message-ID: References: <20220314112731.785042288@linuxfoundation.org> <0ac87017-362d-33e2-eace-3407e0891a94@nvidia.com> <3f809462-217d-fc4d-8e1e-a3d265350fcb@arm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <3f809462-217d-fc4d-8e1e-a3d265350fcb@arm.com> Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Mar 15, 2022 at 12:14:08PM +0000, James Morse wrote: > Hi Greg, > > On 3/14/22 2:57 PM, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > > On Mon, Mar 14, 2022 at 02:14:41PM +0000, Jon Hunter wrote: > > > On 14/03/2022 14:05, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > > > > On Mon, Mar 14, 2022 at 01:58:12PM +0000, Jon Hunter wrote: > > > > > On 14/03/2022 11:34, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > > > > > > This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 4.19.235 release. > > > > > > There are 30 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, 16 Mar 2022 11:27:22 +0000. > > > > > > Anything received after that time might be too late. > > > > > > > > James Morse > > > > > > KVM: arm64: Reset PMC_EL0 to avoid a panic() on systems with no PMU > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The above is causing the following build error for ARM64 ... > > > > > > > > > > arch/arm64/kvm/sys_regs.c: In function ‘reset_pmcr’: > > > > > arch/arm64/kvm/sys_regs.c:624:3: error: implicit declaration of function ‘vcpu_sys_reg’ [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration] > > > > > vcpu_sys_reg(vcpu, PMCR_EL0) = 0; > > > > > ^~~~~~~~~~~~ > > > > > arch/arm64/kvm/sys_regs.c:624:32: error: lvalue required as left operand of assignment > > > > > vcpu_sys_reg(vcpu, PMCR_EL0) = 0; > > > > > > > > > > > > > Is this also broken in Linus's tree? > > > > > > > > > No, Linus' tree is not broken. However, I don't see this change in Linus' > > > tree (v5.17-rc8). > > > > Ah, this is a "fix something broken in stable-only" type patch :( > > > James, I'm dropping this from the 4.19, 4.9, and 4.14 trees right now as > > it looks broken :( > > What would you prefer I do here: > 1 post a revert for the original problematic backport. > 2 post versions of this to fix each of the above 3 stable kernels. (instead of putting conditions in the stable tag). I don't see what I did wrong with the "conditions" in the existing commit you sent. How did I get it wrong? Best case, send a patch series for each kernel tree. That way I "know" I got the right thing here. thanks, greg k-h