On 9/16/20 9:26 AM, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
On Wed, Sep 16, 2020 at 08:26:48AM -0600, Shuah Khan wrote:
On 9/16/20 12:29 AM, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
On Tue, Sep 15, 2020 at 08:54:24PM -0600, Shuah Khan wrote:
On 9/15/20 3:06 PM, Shuah Khan wrote:
On 9/15/20 8:11 AM, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 5.8.10 release. There are 177 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, 17 Sep 2020 14:06:12 +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-5.8.10-rc1....
or in the git tree and branch at: git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/stable/linux-stable-rc.git linux-5.8.y and the diffstat can be found below.
thanks,
greg k-h
Compiled and booted fine. wifi died:
ath10k_pci 0000:02:00.0: could not init core (-110) ath10k_pci 0000:02:00.0: could not probe fw (-110)
This is regression from 5.8.9 and 5.9-rc5 works just fine.
I will try to bisect later this evening to see if I can isolate the commit.
The following commit is what caused ath10k_pci driver problem that killed wifi.
Prateek Sood prsood@codeaurora.org firmware_loader: fix memory leak for paged buffer
https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/stable/linux-stable-rc.git/c...
Ugh, that's not good, is this also a problem in 5.9-rc5 as well? For reference, this is commit 4965b8cd1bc1 ("firmware_loader: fix memory leak for paged buffer") in Linus's tree.
I am not seeing this on Linux 5.9-rc5 for sure.
And it should be showing up in 5.4.y at the moment too, as this patch is in that tree right now...
I don't see this patch in 4.19.146-rc1
It's not there, it's in 5.4.66-rc1, which worked for you somehow, right?
Linus's tree works for with this patch in. I compared the two files for differences in commit between Linus's tree and 5.8.10-rc1
Couldn't find anything obvious.
Again, really odd...
I don't have a problem dropping it, but I should drop it from both 5.4.y and 5.8.y, right?
Sorry. Yes. Dropping from 5.8 and 5.4 would be great until we figure out why this patch causes problems.
I will continue debugging and let you know what I find.
thanks, -- Shuah