Re: [PATCH 6.6 000/389] 6.6.76-rc2 review

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Wed, Feb 19, 2025 at 05:16:19PM +0530, Naresh Kamboju wrote:
> On Mon, 17 Feb 2025 at 17:07, Greg Kroah-Hartman
> <gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, Feb 17, 2025 at 05:00:43PM +0530, Naresh Kamboju wrote:
> > > On Sat, 8 Feb 2025 at 16:54, Naresh Kamboju <naresh.kamboju@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On Thu, 6 Feb 2025 at 21:36, Greg Kroah-Hartman
> > > > <gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 6.6.76 release.
> > > > > There are 389 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 Sat, 08 Feb 2025 15:51:12 +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/v6.x/stable-review/patch-6.6.76-rc2.gz
> > > > > or in the git tree and branch at:
> > > > >         git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/stable/linux-stable-rc.git linux-6.6.y
> > > > > and the diffstat can be found below.
> > > > >
> > > > > thanks,
> > > > >
> > > > > greg k-h
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > There are three different regressions found and reporting here,
> > > > We are working on bisecting and investigating these issues,
> > >
> > > We observed a kernel warning on QEMU-ARM64 and FVP while running the
> > > newly added selftest: arm64: check_hugetlb_options. This issue appears
> > > on 6.6.76 onward and 6.12.13 onward, as reported in the stable review [1].
> > > However, the test case passes successfully on stable 6.13.
> > >
> > > The selftests: arm64: check_hugetlb_options test was introduced following
> > > the recent upgrade of kselftest test sources to the stable 6.13 branch.
> > > As you are aware, LKFT runs the latest kselftest sources (from stable
> > > 6.13.x) on 6.12.x, 6.6.x, and older kernels for validation purposes.
> > >
> > > >From Anders' bisection results, we identified that the missing patch on
> > > 6.12 is likely causing this regression:
> > >
> > > First fixed commit:
> > > [25c17c4b55def92a01e3eecc9c775a6ee25ca20f]
> > > hugetlb: arm64: add MTE support
> > >
> > > Could you confirm whether this patch is eligible for backporting to
> > > 6.12 and 6.6 kernels?
> > > If backporting is not an option, we will need to skip running this
> > > test case on older kernels.
> >
> > The test case itself should properly "skip" if the feature is not
> > present in the kernel.  Why not fix that up instead?
> 
> The reported test gets PASS at the end, but generates kernel warning
> while running the test case (always reproducible) on 6.12 and 6.6.
> 
> The reported warning was not seen on stable 6.13.

So this implies that userspace can cause a kernel warning?  That means
it can cause a DoS, that's not good at all.

So the commit you mention actually fixes a bug then?  Otherwise this
feels really odd, as that means that any kernel without that change can
crash this way.  What changed to cause this to happen?

thanks,

greg k-h




[Index of Archives]     [Kernel]     [Gnu Classpath]     [Gnu Crypto]     [DM Crypt]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]
  Powered by Linux