On Tue, Mar 15, 2022 at 12:14:08PM +0000, James Morse wrote: > Hi Greg, > > On 3/14/22 2:57 PM, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > > On Mon, Mar 14, 2022 at 02:14:41PM +0000, Jon Hunter wrote: > > > On 14/03/2022 14:05, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > > > > On Mon, Mar 14, 2022 at 01:58:12PM +0000, Jon Hunter wrote: > > > > > On 14/03/2022 11:34, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > > > > > > This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 4.19.235 release. > > > > > > There are 30 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 Wed, 16 Mar 2022 11:27:22 +0000. > > > > > > Anything received after that time might be too late. > > > > > > > > James Morse <james.morse@xxxxxxx> > > > > > > KVM: arm64: Reset PMC_EL0 to avoid a panic() on systems with no PMU > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The above is causing the following build error for ARM64 ... > > > > > > > > > > arch/arm64/kvm/sys_regs.c: In function ‘reset_pmcr’: > > > > > arch/arm64/kvm/sys_regs.c:624:3: error: implicit declaration of function ‘vcpu_sys_reg’ [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration] > > > > > vcpu_sys_reg(vcpu, PMCR_EL0) = 0; > > > > > ^~~~~~~~~~~~ > > > > > arch/arm64/kvm/sys_regs.c:624:32: error: lvalue required as left operand of assignment > > > > > vcpu_sys_reg(vcpu, PMCR_EL0) = 0; > > > > > > > > > > > > > Is this also broken in Linus's tree? > > > > > > > > > No, Linus' tree is not broken. However, I don't see this change in Linus' > > > tree (v5.17-rc8). > > > > Ah, this is a "fix something broken in stable-only" type patch :( > > > James, I'm dropping this from the 4.19, 4.9, and 4.14 trees right now as > > it looks broken :( > > What would you prefer I do here: > 1 post a revert for the original problematic backport. > 2 post versions of this to fix each of the above 3 stable kernels. (instead of putting conditions in the stable tag). I don't see what I did wrong with the "conditions" in the existing commit you sent. How did I get it wrong? Best case, send a patch series for each kernel tree. That way I "know" I got the right thing here. thanks, greg k-h
