This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 5.10.123 release. There are 11 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, 16 Jun 2022 18:37:02 +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-5.10.123-rc... or in the git tree and branch at: git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/stable/linux-stable-rc.git linux-5.10.y and the diffstat can be found below.
thanks,
greg k-h
------------- Pseudo-Shortlog of commits:
Greg Kroah-Hartman gregkh@linuxfoundation.org Linux 5.10.123-rc1
Josh Poimboeuf jpoimboe@kernel.org x86/speculation/mmio: Print SMT warning
Pawan Gupta pawan.kumar.gupta@linux.intel.com KVM: x86/speculation: Disable Fill buffer clear within guests
Pawan Gupta pawan.kumar.gupta@linux.intel.com x86/speculation/mmio: Reuse SRBDS mitigation for SBDS
Pawan Gupta pawan.kumar.gupta@linux.intel.com x86/speculation/srbds: Update SRBDS mitigation selection
Pawan Gupta pawan.kumar.gupta@linux.intel.com x86/speculation/mmio: Add sysfs reporting for Processor MMIO Stale Data
Pawan Gupta pawan.kumar.gupta@linux.intel.com x86/speculation/mmio: Enable CPU Fill buffer clearing on idle
Pawan Gupta pawan.kumar.gupta@linux.intel.com x86/bugs: Group MDS, TAA & Processor MMIO Stale Data mitigations
Pawan Gupta pawan.kumar.gupta@linux.intel.com x86/speculation/mmio: Add mitigation for Processor MMIO Stale Data
Pawan Gupta pawan.kumar.gupta@linux.intel.com x86/speculation: Add a common function for MD_CLEAR mitigation update
Pawan Gupta pawan.kumar.gupta@linux.intel.com x86/speculation/mmio: Enumerate Processor MMIO Stale Data bug
Pawan Gupta pawan.kumar.gupta@linux.intel.com Documentation: Add documentation for Processor MMIO Stale Data
-------------
Diffstat:
Documentation/ABI/testing/sysfs-devices-system-cpu | 1 + Documentation/admin-guide/hw-vuln/index.rst | 1 + .../hw-vuln/processor_mmio_stale_data.rst | 246 +++++++++++++++++++++ Documentation/admin-guide/kernel-parameters.txt | 36 +++ Makefile | 4 +- arch/x86/include/asm/cpufeatures.h | 1 + arch/x86/include/asm/msr-index.h | 25 +++ arch/x86/include/asm/nospec-branch.h | 2 + arch/x86/kernel/cpu/bugs.c | 235 +++++++++++++++++--- arch/x86/kernel/cpu/common.c | 52 ++++- arch/x86/kvm/vmx/vmx.c | 72 ++++++ arch/x86/kvm/vmx/vmx.h | 2 + arch/x86/kvm/x86.c | 3 + drivers/base/cpu.c | 8 + include/linux/cpu.h | 3 + tools/arch/x86/include/asm/cpufeatures.h | 1 + tools/arch/x86/include/asm/msr-index.h | 25 +++ 17 files changed, 676 insertions(+), 41 deletions(-)
On 6/14/22 11:40, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 5.10.123 release. There are 11 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, 16 Jun 2022 18:37:02 +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-5.10.123-rc... or in the git tree and branch at: git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/stable/linux-stable-rc.git linux-5.10.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
On 6/14/22 12:40 PM, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 5.10.123 release. There are 11 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, 16 Jun 2022 18:37:02 +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-5.10.123-rc... or in the git tree and branch at: git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/stable/linux-stable-rc.git linux-5.10.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
On Tue, 14 Jun 2022 20:40:22 +0200, Greg Kroah-Hartman gregkh@linuxfoundation.org wrote:
This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 5.10.123 release. There are 11 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, 16 Jun 2022 18:37:02 +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-5.10.123-rc... or in the git tree and branch at: git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/stable/linux-stable-rc.git linux-5.10.y and the diffstat can be found below.
thanks,
greg k-h
5.10.123-rc1 Successfully Compiled and booted on my Raspberry PI 4b (8g) (bcm2711)
Tested-by: Fox Chen foxhlchen@gmail.com
Hi Greg,
On Tue, Jun 14, 2022 at 08:40:22PM +0200, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 5.10.123 release. There are 11 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, 16 Jun 2022 18:37:02 +0000. Anything received after that time might be too late.
Build test (gcc version 11.3.1 20220612): mips: 63 configs -> no failure arm: 104 configs -> no failure arm64: 3 configs -> no failure x86_64: 4 configs -> no failure alpha allmodconfig -> no failure powerpc allmodconfig -> no failure riscv allmodconfig -> no failure s390 allmodconfig -> no failure xtensa allmodconfig -> no failure
Boot test: x86_64: Booted on my test laptop. No regression. x86_64: Booted on qemu. No regression. [1] arm64: Booted on rpi4b (4GB model). No regression. [2]
[1]. https://openqa.qa.codethink.co.uk/tests/1339 [2]. https://openqa.qa.codethink.co.uk/tests/1343
Tested-by: Sudip Mukherjee sudip.mukherjee@codethink.co.uk
-- Regards Sudip
On Wed, 15 Jun 2022 at 00:15, Greg Kroah-Hartman gregkh@linuxfoundation.org wrote:
This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 5.10.123 release. There are 11 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, 16 Jun 2022 18:37:02 +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-5.10.123-rc... or in the git tree and branch at: git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/stable/linux-stable-rc.git linux-5.10.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: 5.10.123-rc1 * git: https://gitlab.com/Linaro/lkft/mirrors/stable/linux-stable-rc * git branch: linux-5.10.y * git commit: f67ea0f670870facb37c20f19e483ec74a2cba63 * git describe: v5.10.122-12-gf67ea0f67087 * test details: https://qa-reports.linaro.org/lkft/linux-stable-rc-linux-5.10.y/build/v5.10....
## Test Regressions (compared to v5.10.118) No test regressions found.
## Metric Regressions (compared to v5.10.118) No metric regressions found.
## Test Fixes (compared to v5.10.118) No test fixes found.
## Metric Fixes (compared to v5.10.118) No metric fixes found.
## Test result summary total: 123351, pass: 110941, fail: 243, skip: 11563, xfail: 604
## Build Summary * arc: 10 total, 10 passed, 0 failed * arm: 314 total, 314 passed, 0 failed * arm64: 58 total, 58 passed, 0 failed * i386: 52 total, 49 passed, 3 failed * mips: 37 total, 37 passed, 0 failed * parisc: 12 total, 12 passed, 0 failed * powerpc: 51 total, 51 passed, 0 failed * riscv: 27 total, 27 passed, 0 failed * s390: 21 total, 21 passed, 0 failed * sh: 24 total, 24 passed, 0 failed * sparc: 12 total, 12 passed, 0 failed * x86_64: 56 total, 55 passed, 1 failed
## Test suites summary * fwts * igt-gpu-tools * kunit * kvm-unit-tests * libgpiod * libhugetlbfs * log-parser-boot * log-parser-test * ltp-cap_bounds * ltp-cap_bounds-tests * ltp-commands * ltp-commands-tests * ltp-containers * ltp-containers-tests * ltp-controllers-tests * ltp-cpuhotplug-tests * ltp-crypto * ltp-crypto-tests * ltp-cve-tests * ltp-dio-tests * ltp-fcntl-locktests * ltp-fcntl-locktests-tests * ltp-filecaps * ltp-filecaps-tests * ltp-fs * ltp-fs-tests * ltp-fs_bind * ltp-fs_bind-tests * ltp-fs_perms_simple * ltp-fs_perms_simple-tests * ltp-fsx * ltp-fsx-tests * ltp-hugetlb * ltp-hugetlb-tests * ltp-io * ltp-io-tests * ltp-ipc * ltp-ipc-tests * ltp-math-tests * ltp-mm-tests * ltp-nptl * ltp-nptl-tests * ltp-open-posix-tests * ltp-pty * ltp-pty-tests * ltp-sched-tests * ltp-securebits * ltp-securebits-tests * ltp-smoke * ltp-syscalls-tests * ltp-tracing-tests * network-basic-tests * packetdrill * perf * perf/Zstd-perf.data-compression * rcutorture * ssuite * v4l2-compliance * vdso
-- Linaro LKFT https://lkft.linaro.org
On Tue, Jun 14, 2022 at 08:40:22PM +0200, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 5.10.123 release. There are 11 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, 16 Jun 2022 18:37:02 +0000. Anything received after that time might be too late.
Build results: total: 163 pass: 163 fail: 0 Qemu test results: total: 477 pass: 477 fail: 0
Tested-by: Guenter Roeck linux@roeck-us.net
Guenter
On 2022/6/15 2:40, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 5.10.123 release. There are 11 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, 16 Jun 2022 18:37:02 +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-5.10.123-rc... or in the git tree and branch at: git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/stable/linux-stable-rc.git linux-5.10.y and the diffstat can be found below.
thanks,
greg k-h
Tested on arm64 and x86 for 5.10.123-rc1,
Kernel repo: https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/stable/linux-stable-rc.git Branch: linux-5.10.y Version: 5.10.123-rc1 Commit: f67ea0f670870facb37c20f19e483ec74a2cba63 Compiler: gcc version 7.3.0 (GCC)
arm64: -------------------------------------------------------------------- Testcase Result Summary: total: 9033 passed: 9033 failed: 0 timeout: 0 --------------------------------------------------------------------
x86: -------------------------------------------------------------------- Testcase Result Summary: total: 9033 passed: 9033 failed: 0 timeout: 0 --------------------------------------------------------------------
Tested-by: Hulk Robot hulkrobot@huawei.com
On 2022-06-14 20:40:22, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 5.10.123 release. There are 11 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, 16 Jun 2022 18:37:02 +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-5.10.123-rc... or in the git tree and branch at: git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/stable/linux-stable-rc.git linux-5.10.y and the diffstat can be found below.
thanks,
greg k-h
Hi Greg - I successfully tested this release candidate in x86_64 Hyper-V Azure VMs with speculation controls both enabled and disabled. Speculation controls are passed through to the guest and, of particular interest for this release candidate, set the FB_CLEAR bit in the IA32_ARCH_CAPABILITIES MSR.
The FB_CLEAR bit's presence is accurately conveyed in the kernel log messages during boot and in the /sys/devices/system/cpu/vulnerabilities/mmio_stale_data file.
I did a full LTP run in both scenarios (the results were the same) and also compared the results to a previous run against the v5.10.118 release (there were no regressions).
Tested-by: Tyler Hicks tyhicks@linux.microsoft.com
Tyler
On 14/06/2022 19:40, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 5.10.123 release. There are 11 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, 16 Jun 2022 18:37:02 +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-5.10.123-rc... or in the git tree and branch at: git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/stable/linux-stable-rc.git linux-5.10.y and the diffstat can be found below.
thanks,
greg k-h
No new regressions for Tegra. I am seeing the following kernel warning that is causing a boot test to fail, but this has been happening for a few releases now (I would have reported it earlier but we have been having some infrastructure issues) ...
WARNING KERN urandom_read_iter: 82 callbacks suppressed
This appears to be introduced by commit "random: convert to using fops->read_iter()" [0]. Interestingly, I am not seeing this in the mainline as far as I can tell and so I am not sure if there is something else that is missing?
Test results for stable-v5.10: 10 builds: 10 pass, 0 fail 28 boots: 28 pass, 0 fail 75 tests: 74 pass, 1 fail
Linux version: 5.10.123-rc1-gf67ea0f67087 Boards tested: tegra124-jetson-tk1, tegra186-p2771-0000, tegra194-p2972-0000, tegra194-p3509-0000+p3668-0000, tegra20-ventana, tegra210-p2371-2180, tegra210-p3450-0000, tegra30-cardhu-a04
Test failures: tegra194-p2972-0000: boot.py
Tested-by: Jon Hunter jonathanh@nvidia.com
Jon
[0] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20220527084907.568432116@linuxfoundation.org/
On 6/16/22 1:48 AM, Jon Hunter wrote:
On 14/06/2022 19:40, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 5.10.123 release. There are 11 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, 16 Jun 2022 18:37:02 +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-5.10.123-rc...
or in the git tree and branch at: git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/stable/linux-stable-rc.git linux-5.10.y and the diffstat can be found below.
thanks,
greg k-h
No new regressions for Tegra. I am seeing the following kernel warning that is causing a boot test to fail, but this has been happening for a few releases now (I would have reported it earlier but we have been having some infrastructure issues) ...
WARNING KERN urandom_read_iter: 82 callbacks suppressed
This appears to be introduced by commit "random: convert to using fops->read_iter()" [0]. Interestingly, I am not seeing this in the mainline as far as I can tell and so I am not sure if there is something else that is missing?
I'm also seeing this on RISC-V. 5.15 and 5.17, but not 5.18.
On 16/06/2022 10:46, Ron Economos wrote:
On 6/16/22 1:48 AM, Jon Hunter wrote:
On 14/06/2022 19:40, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 5.10.123 release. There are 11 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, 16 Jun 2022 18:37:02 +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-5.10.123-rc...
or in the git tree and branch at: git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/stable/linux-stable-rc.git linux-5.10.y and the diffstat can be found below.
thanks,
greg k-h
No new regressions for Tegra. I am seeing the following kernel warning that is causing a boot test to fail, but this has been happening for a few releases now (I would have reported it earlier but we have been having some infrastructure issues) ...
WARNING KERN urandom_read_iter: 82 callbacks suppressed
This appears to be introduced by commit "random: convert to using fops->read_iter()" [0]. Interestingly, I am not seeing this in the mainline as far as I can tell and so I am not sure if there is something else that is missing?
I'm also seeing this on RISC-V. 5.15 and 5.17, but not 5.18.
That's good to know. I don't see this on 5.18 either, just 5.10, 5.15 and 5.17.
Jon
Hi Jon,
On Thu, Jun 16, 2022 at 11:11:25AM +0100, Jon Hunter wrote:
On 16/06/2022 10:46, Ron Economos wrote:
On 6/16/22 1:48 AM, Jon Hunter wrote: I'm also seeing this on RISC-V. 5.15 and 5.17, but not 5.18.
That's good to know. I don't see this on 5.18 either, just 5.10, 5.15 and 5.17.
Right. 5.18 has https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/commit/?i... which I thought was a bit too risky to backport. So on 5.18 you're not seeing this behavior because /dev/urandom is always seeded magically and hence there is never an opportunity to warn about unseeded randomness. Maybe we can think about backporting that if no issues come up after several months, but I'd rather tread lightly with that one.
Anyway, as mentioned in the other message, I've got a patch I'll send out in a minute for the unwanted pr_warn().
Jason
Hi Jon,
On Thu, Jun 16, 2022 at 09:48:37AM +0100, Jon Hunter wrote:
No new regressions for Tegra. I am seeing the following kernel warning that is causing a boot test to fail, but this has been happening for a few releases now (I would have reported it earlier but we have been having some infrastructure issues) ...
WARNING KERN urandom_read_iter: 82 callbacks suppressed
This appears to be introduced by commit "random: convert to using fops->read_iter()" [0]. Interestingly, I am not seeing this in the mainline as far as I can tell and so I am not sure if there is something else that is missing?
Test results for stable-v5.10: 10 builds: 10 pass, 0 fail 28 boots: 28 pass, 0 fail 75 tests: 74 pass, 1 fail
Linux version: 5.10.123-rc1-gf67ea0f67087 Boards tested: tegra124-jetson-tk1, tegra186-p2771-0000, tegra194-p2972-0000, tegra194-p3509-0000+p3668-0000, tegra20-ventana, tegra210-p2371-2180, tegra210-p3450-0000, tegra30-cardhu-a04
Test failures: tegra194-p2972-0000: boot.py
Tested-by: Jon Hunter jonathanh@nvidia.com
Jon
[0] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20220527084907.568432116@linuxfoundation.org/
Please CC me on RNG issues.
I'm surprised that this message results in a failure. It's not a WARN_ON() or a BUG() that's being triggered here. This is just the simple `pr_warn("%s: %d callbacks suppressed\n")` in lib/ratelimit.c, which really shouldn't be causing your CI to fail. Sounds like your harness could use some adjusting.
Nonetheless, you have found a 4 year old bug in the urandom warning accounting that was recently made more easily triggerable by a newer commit, though not the one you mentioned. I'll fix this up and keep you CC'd on the patch, which should make it into stable as well.
Jason
Hi Jason,
On 16/06/2022 14:11, Jason A. Donenfeld wrote:
Hi Jon,
On Thu, Jun 16, 2022 at 09:48:37AM +0100, Jon Hunter wrote:
No new regressions for Tegra. I am seeing the following kernel warning that is causing a boot test to fail, but this has been happening for a few releases now (I would have reported it earlier but we have been having some infrastructure issues) ...
WARNING KERN urandom_read_iter: 82 callbacks suppressed
This appears to be introduced by commit "random: convert to using fops->read_iter()" [0]. Interestingly, I am not seeing this in the mainline as far as I can tell and so I am not sure if there is something else that is missing?
Test results for stable-v5.10: 10 builds: 10 pass, 0 fail 28 boots: 28 pass, 0 fail 75 tests: 74 pass, 1 fail
Linux version: 5.10.123-rc1-gf67ea0f67087 Boards tested: tegra124-jetson-tk1, tegra186-p2771-0000, tegra194-p2972-0000, tegra194-p3509-0000+p3668-0000, tegra20-ventana, tegra210-p2371-2180, tegra210-p3450-0000, tegra30-cardhu-a04
Test failures: tegra194-p2972-0000: boot.py
Tested-by: Jon Hunter jonathanh@nvidia.com
Jon
[0] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20220527084907.568432116@linuxfoundation.org/
Please CC me on RNG issues.
Yes no problem.
I'm surprised that this message results in a failure. It's not a WARN_ON() or a BUG() that's being triggered here. This is just the simple `pr_warn("%s: %d callbacks suppressed\n")` in lib/ratelimit.c, which really shouldn't be causing your CI to fail. Sounds like your harness could use some adjusting.
It is not a hard failure, but any new warning will be flagged and cause this particular test to fail. So all I could see is that a new warning was occurring and wanted to understand what was going on. We can ignore the warning if necessary.
Nonetheless, you have found a 4 year old bug in the urandom warning accounting that was recently made more easily triggerable by a newer commit, though not the one you mentioned. I'll fix this up and keep you CC'd on the patch, which should make it into stable as well.
OK, great! Happy to test anything on my end.
Cheers Jon
Hi!
This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 5.10.123 release. There are 11 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.
CIP testing did not find any problems here:
https://gitlab.com/cip-project/cip-testing/linux-stable-rc-ci/-/tree/linux-5...
Tested-by: Pavel Machek (CIP) pavel@denx.de
Best regards, Pavel
-
Florian Fainelli -
Fox Chen -
Greg Kroah-Hartman -
Guenter Roeck -
Jason A. Donenfeld -
Jon Hunter -
Naresh Kamboju -
Pavel Machek -
Ron Economos -
Samuel Zou -
Shuah Khan -
Sudip Mukherjee -
Tyler Hicks