Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [PATCH 4.19 00/30] 4.19.235-rc1 review | From | James Morse <> | Date | Tue, 15 Mar 2022 12:14:08 +0000 |
| |
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@arm.com> >>>>> 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).
Thanks,
James
| |