Re: [PATCH 6.1 000/533] 6.1.165-rc2 review

[Sasha Levin]

On Mon, Mar 02, 2026 at 11:06:17PM +0530, Harshit Mogalapalli wrote:
> Hi Sasha,
>
> On 02/03/26 22:56, Peter Schneider wrote:
> > Am 02.03.2026 um 17:09 schrieb Sasha Levin:
> > > This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 6.1.165 release.
> > > There are 533 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.
> >
> >
> > I get a build error in arch/x86/kernel/setup.c:
> >
> >   CC      arch/x86/kernel/setup.o
> > arch/x86/kernel/setup.c: In function ‘ima_get_kexec_buffer’:
> > arch/x86/kernel/setup.c:385:15: error: implicit declaration of 
> > function ‘ima_validate_range’ [-Wimplicit-function-declaration]
> >   385 |         ret = ima_validate_range(ima_kexec_buffer_phys, 
> > ima_kexec_buffer_size);
> >       |               ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> > make[3]: *** [scripts/Makefile.build:250: arch/x86/kernel/setup.o] Fehler 1
> > make[2]: *** [scripts/Makefile.build:503: arch/x86/kernel] Fehler 2
> > make[1]: *** [scripts/Makefile.build:503: arch/x86] Fehler 2
> > make: *** [Makefile:2025: .] Fehler 2
> > root@linus:/usr/src/linux-stable-rc#
> >
> >
> > I always do my test builds with CONFIG_WEROR=Y, full .config attached.
> >
> > The line causing the error seems to come from
> >
> > 73b97ee06bd63 x86/kexec: add a sanity check on previous kernel's ima 
> > kexec buffer [ Upstream commit 
> > c5489d04337b47e93c0623e8145fcba3f5739efd ]
>
> Interesting: I didn't get an email that this got queued to 6.1.165, 
> note: this is not in 6.1.165-rc1, but in 6.1.165-rc2.
>
> I only got: FAILED: Patch "x86/kexec: add a sanity check on previous 
> kernel's ima kexec buffer" failed to apply to 6.1-stable tree
>
> In any case: we need a prerequisite for this, so I will work on 
> backports in a few days, I think for now, we should drop this commit 
> from 6.1.y.
>
> Also I see something unusual -->
>
> 6.1.165-rc1 --> 232 patches.
>
> 6.1.165-rc2 --> 533 patches.
>
> Can you please check ?

That's the reason for -rc2 :) See:

https://lore.kernel.org/all/aaWWE5uQqz_eG69i@laps/

--
Thanks,
Sasha