Re: [PATCH 3.10 000/319] 3.10.105-stable review

[Willy Tarreau]

On Mon, Feb 06, 2017 at 06:46:39AM -0800, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> On 02/06/2017 12:13 AM, Willy Tarreau wrote:
> > On Sun, Feb 05, 2017 at 08:09:04PM +0100, Willy Tarreau wrote:
> > > This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 3.10.105 release.
> > > 
> > > NOTE! This series is quite large as I've caught up with many pending fixes
> > > that were submitted for -stable long ago and that I had been holding on
> > > since 3.10.103 due to limited time. Most fixes address stability issues
> > > in crypto, net, usb, scsi, kvm, random info leaks, and risks of oopses
> > > in various subsystems. My pending queue is now empty.
> > > 
> > > It builds fine here on i586 and x86_64 for allmodconfig and on armv7 with
> > > mvebu_defconfig.
> > > 
> > > All patches will be posted as a response to this one. If anyone has any
> > > issue with these being applied, please let me know. If anyone thinks some
> > > important patches are missing and should be added prior to the release,
> > > please report them quickly with their respective mainline commit IDs.
> > > 
> > > Responses should be made by Fri Feb 10 10:00:00 CET 2017.
> > > Anything received after that time might be too late. If someone
> > > wants a bit more time for a deeper review, please let me know.
> > > 
> > > The whole patch series can be found in one patch at :
> > >    https://kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/v3.x/stable-review/patch-3.10.105-rc1.gz
> > 
> > An updated patch was pushed here :
> > 
> >   https://kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/v3.x/stable-review/patch-3.10.105-rc2.gz
> > 
> 
> Better, but unfortunately there is now a different build error.
> 
> Build results:
> 	total: 124 pass: 122 fail: 2
> Failed builds:
> 	x86_64:allyesconfig
> 	x86_64:allmodconfig
> 
> Qemu test results:
> 	total: 83 pass: 83 fail: 0
> 
> Build error:
> 
> drivers/block/xen-blkback/common.h: In function 'blkif_get_x86_32_req':
> drivers/block/xen-blkback/common.h:272:2: error: implicit declaration of function 'READ_ONCE'

Thank you, I didn't realize that one of the Xen patches was depending
on it. It will make things a bit more complicated but it's easier for
me to debug an architecture I can more easily test ;-)

Willy