Re: [PATCH 4.9 00/29] 4.9.106-stable review

[Guenter Roeck]

On Mon, Jun 04, 2018 at 09:16:49AM -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 04, 2018 at 08:57:56AM +0200, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> > This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 4.9.106 release.
> > There are 29 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 Jun  6 06:57:52 UTC 2018.
> > Anything received after that time might be too late.
> > 
> 
> For v4.9.105-30-ge0f8632 (4.9.106-rc1-00030-ge0f8632):
> 
> Build results:
> 	total: 148 pass: 148 fail: 0
> Qemu test results:
> 	total: 139 pass: 137 fail: 2
> Failed tests: 
> 	mips64:malta_defconfig:nosmp
> 	mips64:malta_defconfig:smp
> 
> Qemu tests fail with:
> 
> This architecture does not have kernel memory protection.
> random: fast init done
> Kernel panic - not syncing: Attempted to kill init! exitcode=0x0000000a
> 
> ---[ end Kernel panic - not syncing: Attempted to kill init! exitcode=0x0000000a
> 
> While tracking this down, I found commit 4e4636cf981b ("objtool: Enclose
> contents of unreachable() macro in a block"), which says "... Guenter Roeck
> reported a boot failure in mips64 ...". Go figure. Applying commit
> 4e4636cf981b on top of v4.9.106-rc1 indeed fixes the problem.
> 

An additional note: It appears that neither 009615ab7fd4 ("USB: serial: cp210x:
use tcflag_t to fix incompatible pointer type") nor 0fde7ad71ee3 ("sparc64: Fix
build warnings with gcc 7") made it into v4.9.106-rc1, even though you mentioned
that they did, or at least I think you did. What happened ?

Thanks,
Guenter