Re: [PATCH 5.11 000/342] 5.11.20-rc1 review

[Justin Forbes]

On Tue, May 11, 2021 at 11:46 AM Greg Kroah-Hartman
<gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On Tue, May 11, 2021 at 10:16:00AM -0600, Shuah Khan wrote:
> > On 5/11/21 7:35 AM, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> > > On Mon, May 10, 2021 at 04:48:01PM -0600, Shuah Khan wrote:
> > > > On 5/10/21 4:16 AM, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> > > > > This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 5.11.20 release.
> > > > > There are 342 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, 12 May 2021 10:19:23 +0000.
> > > > > Anything received after that time might be too late.
> > > > >
> > > > > The whole patch series can be found in one patch at:
> > > > >         https://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/v5.x/stable-review/patch-5.11.20-rc1.gz
> > > > > or in the git tree and branch at:
> > > > >         git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/stable/linux-stable-rc.git linux-5.11.y
> > > > > and the diffstat can be found below.
> > > > >
> > > > > thanks,
> > > > >
> > > > > greg k-h
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > Compiled and doesn't boot. Dies in kmem_cache_alloc_node() called
> > > > from alloc_skb_with_frags()
> > > >
> > > > I will start bisect.
> > > >
> > > > Tested-by: Shuah Khan <skhan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > >
> > > It might be due to 79fcd446e7e1 ("drm/amdgpu: Fix memory leak") which I
> > > have reverted from 5.12 and 5.11 queues now and pushed out a -rc2.  If
> > > you could test those to verify this or not, that would be great.
> > >
> >
> > I am seeing other display issues as well. This might be it.
> >
> > I couldn't find rc2. Checking out
> > git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/stable/linux-stable-rc.git
> > linux-5.11.y
>
> Ah, sorry, pushed the -rc2 patch out now, but the -rc git tree has it as
> well.
>

Tested rc2 against the Fedora build system (aarch64, armv7, ppc64le,
s390x, x86_64), and boot tested x86_64. No regressions.

Tested-by: Justin M. Forbes <jforbes@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>