On 10/6/23 05:15, Sasha Levin wrote:
On Fri, Oct 06, 2023 at 01:03:30PM +0200, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
On Fri, Oct 06, 2023 at 04:07:14PM +0530, Harshit Mogalapalli wrote:
On 06/10/23 3:55 pm, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
On Wed, Oct 04, 2023 at 11:43:46AM -0700, Florian Fainelli wrote:
On 10/4/23 10:53, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 5.15.134
release.
There are 183 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, 06 Oct 2023 17:51:12 +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-5.15.134-rc...
or in the git tree and branch at:
git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/stable/linux-stable-rc.git linux-5.15.y
and the diffstat can be found below.
thanks,
greg k-h
perf fails to build with:
CC
/local/users/fainelli/buildroot/output/arm/build/linux-custom/tools/perf/util/metricgroup.o
util/metricgroup.c: In function 'metricgroup__parse_groups': util/metricgroup.c:1261:7: error: 'table' undeclared (first use
in this
function) if (!table) ^~~~~ util/metricgroup.c:1261:7: note: each undeclared identifier is
reported only
once for each function it appears in make[6]: ***
[/local/users/fainelli/buildroot/output/arm/build/linux-custom/tools/build/Makefile.build:97: /local/users/fainelli/buildroot/output/arm/build/linux-custom/tools/perf/util/metricgroup.o]
Error 1
caused by c1ef510a0f2a879bf29ddebae766ec9f0790eb8f ("perf metric:
Return
early if no CPU PMU table exists"). Dropping this commit allows
the build to
continue.
I had reported in the previous cycle that 00facc760903be66 ("perf
jevents:
Switch build to use jevents.py") was causing build failures:
https://lore.kernel.org/all/6a577578-8adb-aa70-1bf8-b1a4573152cf@gmail.com/
do we still want these commits to be included?
No, I'll go drop them now, thanks for the report.
Thought: It's not the first time we see build failures in tools/perf -- would it make sense to add this to your own build tests to reduce the round trip time for these errors ?
Last time I tried to build perf, I couldn't do it at all so I just gave up trying to test for it :)
Same... I've also removed perf from AUTOSEL for that reason.
I suppose that is fair, if there is a critical bug in perf, we could submit it "manually" to ensure it reaches the stable trees. Probably better managed that way. Thanks!