On Fri, Feb 03, 2023 at 05:56:17PM +0100, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
On 03/02/2023 16:51, Guenter Roeck wrote:
On 2/3/23 04:28, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
On 03/02/2023 12:04, Naresh Kamboju wrote:
On Fri, 3 Feb 2023 at 15:48, Greg Kroah-Hartman gregkh@linuxfoundation.org wrote:
This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 4.19.272 release. There are 80 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 Sun, 05 Feb 2023 10:09:58 +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/v4.x/stable-review/patch-4.19.272-rc... or in the git tree and branch at: git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/stable/linux-stable-rc.git linux-4.19.y and the diffstat can be found below.
thanks,
greg k-h
Following patch caused build error on arm,
Gaosheng Cui cuigaosheng1@huawei.com memory: mvebu-devbus: Fix missing clk_disable_unprepare in mvebu_devbus_probe()
drivers/memory/mvebu-devbus.c: In function 'mvebu_devbus_probe': drivers/memory/mvebu-devbus.c:297:8: error: implicit declaration of function 'devm_clk_get_enabled' [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration] 297 | clk = devm_clk_get_enabled(&pdev->dev, NULL); | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Already reported: https://lore.kernel.org/all/202302020048.ZsmUJDHo-lkp@intel.com/
I don't usually check if release candidate reports have been reported already. If I know about it, I may add a reference to the report, but typically I still report it.
Personally I find it discouraging to get those "already reported" e-mails. To me it sounds like "hey, you didn't do your job properly". It should not matter if a problem was already reported or not, and I find it valuable if it is reported multiple times because it gives an indication of the level of test coverage. I would find it better if people would use something like "Also reported:" instead. But then maybe I am just oversensitive, who knows.
Anyway, yes, I noticed this problem as well (and probably overlooked it in my previous report to Greg - sorry for that).
Let me rephrase it then:
This topic is already discussed here: https://lore.kernel.org/all/202302020048.ZsmUJDHo-lkp@intel.com/
I proposed to drop both broken backports - mvebu-devbus and atmel-sdramc, because they require new features in common clock framework API.
Ah, I totally missed that, again, seeing the good in the mess of the 0-day reports here is hard and not obvious at all. I ignored that and hence the problem was here. I've dropped the offending commit now.
thanks,
greg k-h