Re: [PATCH 5.10 000/135] 5.10.192-rc1 review

[Greg Kroah-Hartman]

On Sat, Aug 26, 2023 at 11:38:56AM +0100, Conor Dooley wrote:
> On Sat, Aug 26, 2023 at 12:08:20PM +0200, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> > On Fri, Aug 25, 2023 at 07:24:29AM -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> > > On Thu, Aug 24, 2023 at 07:07:52PM +0200, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> > > > This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 5.10.192 release.
> > > > There are 135 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 Sat, 26 Aug 2023 17:05:50 +0000.
> > > > Anything received after that time might be too late.
> > > > 
> > > 
> > > Testing is not complete, but early feedback: All riscv32 boot tests
> > > crash badly with errors such as
> > > 
> > > Starting syslogd: OK
> > > Starting klogd: OK
> > > /etc/init.d/S02sysctl: line 68: syntax error: EOF in backquote substitution
> > > /etc/init.d/S20seedrng: line 33: syntax error: unexpected end of file (expecting ";;")
> > > Starting network: /bin/sh: syntax error: unterminated quoted string
> > > sed: unmatched '/'
> > > /bin/sh: syntax error: unterminated quoted string
> > > FAIL
> > > /etc/init.d/S55runtest: line 48: syntax error: EOF in backquote substitution
> > > 
> > > This is no longer seen after reverting the following patches.
> > > 
> > > 92609bb3a1f8 riscv: uaccess: Return the number of bytes effectively not copied
> > > e06648704417 riscv: lib: uaccess: fix CSR_STATUS SR_SUM bit
> > > 20704d763646 riscv: lib: uaccess: fold fixups into body
> > > 4f503bad920e riscv: __asm_copy_to-from_user: Optimize unaligned memory access and pipeline stall
> > 
> > Thanks for the review, I'll go drop all of the riscv patches here.
> > Really, we shouldn't be adding any of them to any kernels older than
> > 5.15 these days as I do not think anyone using that cpu is using those
> > older kernels (or at least I sure hope not...)
> 
> I know one of the main cpu IP vendors does run a 5.10 based tree, but
> that thing is both an abomination of out-of-tree patches to core arch
> code & about 100 releases out of date, therefore not really worth
> factoring. Anyone in their right mind should be running something
> significantly more recent than 5.10 for riscv.

Thanks for the verification.  Anyone using such an abomination of a
tree, gets their support from the creator of such an abomination :)

greg k-h