Re: [PATCH 4.14 00/95] 4.14.4-stable review

> On Dec 6, 2017, at 12:49 AM, Greg Kroah-Hartman <gre...@linuxfoundation.org> > wrote: > > On Tue, Dec 05, 2017 at 03:45:07PM -0600, Tom Gall wrote: >> >> >>> On Dec 5, 2017, at 12:24 AM, Greg Kroah-Hartman >>> <gre...@linuxfoundation.org&

Re: [PATCH 4.14 00/95] 4.14.4-stable review

> On Dec 6, 2017, at 12:49 AM, Greg Kroah-Hartman > wrote: > > On Tue, Dec 05, 2017 at 03:45:07PM -0600, Tom Gall wrote: >> >> >>> On Dec 5, 2017, at 12:24 AM, Greg Kroah-Hartman >>> wrote: >>> >>> On Mon, Dec 04, 2017 at 03:12:

Re: [PATCH 4.14 00/95] 4.14.4-stable review

> On Dec 5, 2017, at 12:24 AM, Greg Kroah-Hartman <gre...@linuxfoundation.org> > wrote: > > On Mon, Dec 04, 2017 at 03:12:45PM -0600, Tom Gall wrote: >> >> >>> On Dec 4, 2017, at 9:59 AM, Greg Kroah-Hartman <gre...@linuxfoundation.org> >&g

Re: [PATCH 4.14 00/95] 4.14.4-stable review

> On Dec 5, 2017, at 12:24 AM, Greg Kroah-Hartman > wrote: > > On Mon, Dec 04, 2017 at 03:12:45PM -0600, Tom Gall wrote: >> >> >>> On Dec 4, 2017, at 9:59 AM, Greg Kroah-Hartman >>> wrote: >>> >>> This is the start of the

Re: [PATCH 4.14 00/95] 4.14.4-stable review

> On Dec 4, 2017, at 9:59 AM, Greg Kroah-Hartman > wrote: > > This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 4.14.4 release. > There are 95 patches in this series, all will be posted as a response > to this one. If anyone has any issues with these being

Re: [PATCH 4.14 00/95] 4.14.4-stable review

> On Dec 4, 2017, at 9:59 AM, Greg Kroah-Hartman > wrote: > > This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 4.14.4 release. > There are 95 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. >

Re: [PATCH 4.14 000/193] 4.14.3-stable review

> On Nov 28, 2017, at 11:13 PM, Greg Kroah-Hartman <gre...@linuxfoundation.org> > wrote: > > On Tue, Nov 28, 2017 at 04:17:08PM -0600, Tom Gall wrote: >> >> >>> On Nov 28, 2017, at 4:24 AM, Greg Kroah-Hartman >>> <gre...@linuxfoundation.o

Re: [PATCH 4.14 000/193] 4.14.3-stable review

> On Nov 28, 2017, at 11:13 PM, Greg Kroah-Hartman > wrote: > > On Tue, Nov 28, 2017 at 04:17:08PM -0600, Tom Gall wrote: >> >> >>> On Nov 28, 2017, at 4:24 AM, Greg Kroah-Hartman >>> wrote: >>> >>> This is the start of the s

Re: [PATCH 4.14 000/193] 4.14.3-stable review

ollowing package test suites on x86-64 without any errors: alsa-lib boringssl e2fsprogs libusb sqlite Signed-off-by: Tom Gall <tom.g...@linaro.org>

Re: [PATCH 4.14 000/193] 4.14.3-stable review

n x86-64 without any errors: alsa-lib boringssl e2fsprogs libusb sqlite Signed-off-by: Tom Gall

Re: [LTP] Towards 4.14 LTS

> On Nov 20, 2017, at 10:10 AM, Cyril Hrubis wrote: > > Hi! >> So why didn???t we report these? As mentioned we???ve been tossing out dodgy >> test cases to get to a clean baseline. We don???t need or want noise. >> >> For LTS, I want the system when it detects a failure to

Re: [LTP] Towards 4.14 LTS

> On Nov 20, 2017, at 10:10 AM, Cyril Hrubis wrote: > > Hi! >> So why didn???t we report these? As mentioned we???ve been tossing out dodgy >> test cases to get to a clean baseline. We don???t need or want noise. >> >> For LTS, I want the system when it detects a failure to enable a quick

Re: Towards 4.14 LTS

> On Nov 19, 2017, at 5:20 AM, Greg Kroah-Hartman <gre...@linuxfoundation.org> > wrote: > > On Thu, Nov 16, 2017 at 10:50:23PM -0600, Tom Gall wrote: >> At Linaro we’ve been putting effort into regularly running kernel tests over >> arm, arm64 and x86_64 targets.

Re: Towards 4.14 LTS

> On Nov 19, 2017, at 5:20 AM, Greg Kroah-Hartman > wrote: > > On Thu, Nov 16, 2017 at 10:50:23PM -0600, Tom Gall wrote: >> At Linaro we’ve been putting effort into regularly running kernel tests over >> arm, arm64 and x86_64 targets. On those targets we’re run

Towards 4.14 LTS

At Linaro we’ve been putting effort into regularly running kernel tests over arm, arm64 and x86_64 targets. On those targets we’re running mainline, -next, 4.4, and 4.9 kernels and yes we are adding to this list as the hardware capacity grows. For test buckets we’re using just LTP, kselftest

Towards 4.14 LTS

At Linaro we’ve been putting effort into regularly running kernel tests over arm, arm64 and x86_64 targets. On those targets we’re running mainline, -next, 4.4, and 4.9 kernels and yes we are adding to this list as the hardware capacity grows. For test buckets we’re using just LTP, kselftest

Re: [PATCH 4.9 00/87] 4.9.62-stable review

> On Nov 13, 2017, at 6:55 AM, Greg Kroah-Hartman > wrote: > > This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 4.9.62 release. > There are 87 patches in this series, all will be posted as a response > to this one. If anyone has any issues with these being

Re: [PATCH 4.9 00/87] 4.9.62-stable review

> On Nov 13, 2017, at 6:55 AM, Greg Kroah-Hartman > wrote: > > This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 4.9.62 release. > There are 87 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.

Re: [PATCH 4.4 00/56] 4.4.98-stable review

> On Nov 13, 2017, at 6:55 AM, Greg Kroah-Hartman > wrote: > > This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 4.4.98 release. > There are 56 patches in this series, all will be posted as a response > to this one. If anyone has any issues with these being

Re: [PATCH 4.4 00/56] 4.4.98-stable review

> On Nov 13, 2017, at 6:55 AM, Greg Kroah-Hartman > wrote: > > This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 4.4.98 release. > There are 56 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.

Re: [PATCH 4.4 00/40] 4.4.97-stable review

> On Nov 6, 2017, at 3:44 AM, Greg Kroah-Hartman > wrote: > > This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 4.4.97 release. > There are 40 patches in this series, all will be posted as a response > to this one. If anyone has any issues with these being

Re: [PATCH 4.4 00/40] 4.4.97-stable review

> On Nov 6, 2017, at 3:44 AM, Greg Kroah-Hartman > wrote: > > This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 4.4.97 release. > There are 40 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. >

Re: [PATCH 4.9 00/67] 4.9.61-stable review

> On Nov 6, 2017, at 3:43 AM, Greg Kroah-Hartman > wrote: > > This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 4.9.61 release. > There are 67 patches in this series, all will be posted as a response > to this one. If anyone has any issues with these being

Re: [PATCH 4.9 00/67] 4.9.61-stable review

> On Nov 6, 2017, at 3:43 AM, Greg Kroah-Hartman > wrote: > > This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 4.9.61 release. > There are 67 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. >

Re: [PATCH 4.4 00/20] 4.4.96-stable review

> On Oct 31, 2017, at 4:55 AM, Greg Kroah-Hartman > wrote: > > This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 4.4.96 release. > There are 20 patches in this series, all will be posted as a response > to this one. If anyone has any issues with these being

Re: [PATCH 4.4 00/20] 4.4.96-stable review

> On Oct 31, 2017, at 4:55 AM, Greg Kroah-Hartman > wrote: > > This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 4.4.96 release. > There are 20 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. >

Re: [PATCH 4.9 00/23] 4.9.60-stable review

> On Oct 31, 2017, at 4:55 AM, Greg Kroah-Hartman > wrote: > > This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 4.9.60 release. > There are 23 patches in this series, all will be posted as a response > to this one. If anyone has any issues with these being

Re: [PATCH 4.9 00/23] 4.9.60-stable review

> On Oct 31, 2017, at 4:55 AM, Greg Kroah-Hartman > wrote: > > This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 4.9.60 release. > There are 23 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. >

Re: [PATCH 4.4 00/27] 4.4.95-stable review

> On Oct 24, 2017, at 7:57 AM, Greg Kroah-Hartman > wrote: > > This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 4.4.95 release. > There are 27 patches in this series, all will be posted as a response > to this one. If anyone has any issues with these being

Re: [PATCH 4.4 00/27] 4.4.95-stable review

> On Oct 24, 2017, at 7:57 AM, Greg Kroah-Hartman > wrote: > > This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 4.4.95 release. > There are 27 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. >

Re: [PATCH 4.9 00/48] 4.9.59-stable review

> On Oct 24, 2017, at 8:03 AM, Greg Kroah-Hartman > wrote: > > This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 4.9.59 release. > There are 48 patches in this series, all will be posted as a response > to this one. If anyone has any issues with these being

Re: [PATCH 4.9 00/48] 4.9.59-stable review

> On Oct 24, 2017, at 8:03 AM, Greg Kroah-Hartman > wrote: > > This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 4.9.59 release. > There are 48 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. >

Re: [PATCH 4.4 00/46] 4.4.94-stable review

> On Oct 21, 2017, at 2:25 AM, Greg Kroah-Hartman <gre...@linuxfoundation.org> > wrote: > > On Fri, Oct 20, 2017 at 11:54:38AM -0500, Tom Gall wrote: >> On Fri, Oct 20, 2017 at 1:26 AM, Greg Kroah-Hartman >>>> fcntl36 and raw_skew we’ll looki

Re: [PATCH 4.4 00/46] 4.4.94-stable review

> On Oct 21, 2017, at 2:25 AM, Greg Kroah-Hartman > wrote: > > On Fri, Oct 20, 2017 at 11:54:38AM -0500, Tom Gall wrote: >> On Fri, Oct 20, 2017 at 1:26 AM, Greg Kroah-Hartman >>>> fcntl36 and raw_skew we’ll looking into. >>>> >

Re: [PATCH 4.4 00/46] 4.4.94-stable review

On Fri, Oct 20, 2017 at 1:26 AM, Greg Kroah-Hartman <gre...@linuxfoundation.org> wrote: > On Thu, Oct 19, 2017 at 05:18:38PM -0500, Tom Gall wrote: >> >> > On Oct 19, 2017, at 8:48 AM, Greg Kroah-Hartman >> > <gre...@linuxfoundation.org> wrote: >>

Re: [PATCH 4.4 00/46] 4.4.94-stable review

On Fri, Oct 20, 2017 at 1:26 AM, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > On Thu, Oct 19, 2017 at 05:18:38PM -0500, Tom Gall wrote: >> >> > On Oct 19, 2017, at 8:48 AM, Greg Kroah-Hartman >> > wrote: >> > >> > This is the start of the stable review cycle for

Re: [PATCH 4.9 00/51] 4.9.58-stable review

> On Oct 19, 2017, at 8:48 AM, Greg Kroah-Hartman > wrote: > > This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 4.9.58 release. > There are 51 patches in this series, all will be posted as a response > to this one. If anyone has any issues with these being

Re: [PATCH 4.9 00/51] 4.9.58-stable review

> On Oct 19, 2017, at 8:48 AM, Greg Kroah-Hartman > wrote: > > This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 4.9.58 release. > There are 51 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. >

Re: [PATCH 4.4 00/46] 4.4.94-stable review

> On Oct 19, 2017, at 8:48 AM, Greg Kroah-Hartman > wrote: > > This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 4.4.94 release. > There are 46 patches in this series, all will be posted as a response > to this one. If anyone has any issues with these being

Re: [PATCH 4.4 00/46] 4.4.94-stable review

> On Oct 19, 2017, at 8:48 AM, Greg Kroah-Hartman > wrote: > > This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 4.4.94 release. > There are 46 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. >

Re: [PATCH 4.4 00/47] 4.4.92-stable review

On Wed, Oct 11, 2017 at 11:47 AM, Greg Kroah-Hartman <gre...@linuxfoundation.org> wrote: > On Wed, Oct 11, 2017 at 11:12:15AM -0500, Tom Gall wrote: >> Let’s try that again with less HTML stupidness …. >> >> On Oct 11, 2017, at 11:05 AM, Tom Gall <tom.g...@linaro.or

Re: [PATCH 4.4 00/47] 4.4.92-stable review

On Wed, Oct 11, 2017 at 11:47 AM, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > On Wed, Oct 11, 2017 at 11:12:15AM -0500, Tom Gall wrote: >> Let’s try that again with less HTML stupidness …. >> >> On Oct 11, 2017, at 11:05 AM, Tom Gall wrote: >> >> >> > On Oct 10, 2017, a

Re: [PATCH 4.9 000/105] 4.9.55-stable review

> On Oct 10, 2017, at 2:49 PM, Greg Kroah-Hartman > wrote: > > This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 4.9.55 release. > There are 105 patches in this series, all will be posted as a response > to this one. If anyone has any issues with these being

Re: [PATCH 4.9 000/105] 4.9.55-stable review

> On Oct 10, 2017, at 2:49 PM, Greg Kroah-Hartman > wrote: > > This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 4.9.55 release. > There are 105 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.

Re: [PATCH 4.4 00/47] 4.4.92-stable review

Let’s try that again with less HTML stupidness …. On Oct 11, 2017, at 11:05 AM, Tom Gall <tom.g...@linaro.org> wrote: > On Oct 10, 2017, at 2:50 PM, Greg Kroah-Hartman <gre...@linuxfoundation.org> > wrote: > > This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 4.4.92

Re: [PATCH 4.4 00/47] 4.4.92-stable review

Let’s try that again with less HTML stupidness …. On Oct 11, 2017, at 11:05 AM, Tom Gall wrote: > On Oct 10, 2017, at 2:50 PM, Greg Kroah-Hartman > wrote: > > This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 4.4.92 release. > There are 47 patches in this series, all

Re: [PATCH 4.4 00/47] 4.4.92-stable review

> On Oct 10, 2017, at 2:50 PM, Greg Kroah-Hartman > wrote: > > This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 4.4.92 release. > There are 47 patches in this series, all will be posted as a response > to this one. If anyone has any issues with these being

Re: [PATCH 4.4 00/47] 4.4.92-stable review

> On Oct 10, 2017, at 2:50 PM, Greg Kroah-Hartman > wrote: > > This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 4.4.92 release. > There are 47 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. >

Re: [PATCH 4.9 000/104] 4.9.54-stable review

On Tue, Oct 10, 2017 at 2:11 AM, Greg Kroah-Hartman <gre...@linuxfoundation.org> wrote: > On Mon, Oct 09, 2017 at 03:37:43PM -0500, Tom Gall wrote: >> On Sun, Oct 8, 2017 at 2:23 AM, Greg Kroah-Hartman >> <gre...@linuxfoundation.org> wrote: >> >> kernel:

Re: [PATCH 4.9 000/104] 4.9.54-stable review

On Tue, Oct 10, 2017 at 2:11 AM, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > On Mon, Oct 09, 2017 at 03:37:43PM -0500, Tom Gall wrote: >> On Sun, Oct 8, 2017 at 2:23 AM, Greg Kroah-Hartman >> wrote: >> >> kernel: 4.9.54-rc1 >> >> git repo: >> >> https://g

Re: [PATCH 4.9 000/104] 4.9.54-stable review

Hi Greg, On Sun, Oct 8, 2017 at 2:23 AM, Greg Kroah-Hartman <gre...@linuxfoundation.org> wrote: > On Sat, Oct 07, 2017 at 11:56:17AM -0500, Tom Gall wrote: >> >> > On Oct 6, 2017, at 3:50 AM, Greg Kroah-Hartman >> > <gre...@linuxfoundation.org> wrote: &g

Re: [PATCH 4.9 000/104] 4.9.54-stable review

Hi Greg, On Sun, Oct 8, 2017 at 2:23 AM, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > On Sat, Oct 07, 2017 at 11:56:17AM -0500, Tom Gall wrote: >> >> > On Oct 6, 2017, at 3:50 AM, Greg Kroah-Hartman >> > wrote: >> > >> > This is the start of the stable review cyc

Re: [PATCH 4.4 00/50] 4.4.91-stable review

> On Oct 6, 2017, at 3:52 AM, Greg Kroah-Hartman > wrote: > > This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 4.4.91 release. > There are 50 patches in this series, all will be posted as a response > to this one. If anyone has any issues with these being

Re: [PATCH 4.9 000/104] 4.9.54-stable review

> On Oct 6, 2017, at 3:50 AM, Greg Kroah-Hartman > wrote: > > This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 4.9.54 release. > There are 104 patches in this series, all will be posted as a response > to this one. If anyone has any issues with these being

Re: [PATCH 4.4 00/50] 4.4.91-stable review

> On Oct 6, 2017, at 3:52 AM, Greg Kroah-Hartman > wrote: > > This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 4.4.91 release. > There are 50 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. >

Re: [PATCH 4.9 000/104] 4.9.54-stable review

> On Oct 6, 2017, at 3:50 AM, Greg Kroah-Hartman > wrote: > > This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 4.9.54 release. > There are 104 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. >

Re: [PATCH 4.4 00/41] 4.4.90-stable review

> On Oct 3, 2017, at 7:21 AM, Greg Kroah-Hartman > wrote: > > This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 4.4.90 release. > There are 41 patches in this series, all will be posted as a response > to this one. If anyone has any issues with these being

Re: [PATCH 4.4 00/41] 4.4.90-stable review

> On Oct 3, 2017, at 7:21 AM, Greg Kroah-Hartman > wrote: > > This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 4.4.90 release. > There are 41 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. >

Re: [PATCH 4.9 00/64] 4.9.53-stable review

> On Oct 3, 2017, at 7:22 AM, Greg Kroah-Hartman > wrote: > > This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 4.9.53 release. > There are 64 patches in this series, all will be posted as a response > to this one. If anyone has any issues with these being

Re: [PATCH 4.9 00/64] 4.9.53-stable review

> On Oct 3, 2017, at 7:22 AM, Greg Kroah-Hartman > wrote: > > This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 4.9.53 release. > There are 64 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. >

Re: [PATCH 4.9 00/77] 4.9.52-stable review

On Sun, Sep 24, 2017 at 3:31 PM, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 4.9.52 release. > There are 77 patches in this series, all will be posted as a response > to this one. If anyone has any issues with these being applied,

Re: [PATCH 4.9 00/77] 4.9.52-stable review

On Sun, Sep 24, 2017 at 3:31 PM, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 4.9.52 release. > There are 77 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. > >

Re: [PATCH 4.9 00/78] 4.9.51-stable review

On Mon, Sep 18, 2017 at 4:11 AM, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 4.9.51 release. > There are 78 patches in this series, all will be posted as a response > to this one. If anyone has any issues with these being applied,

Re: [PATCH 4.9 00/78] 4.9.51-stable review

On Mon, Sep 18, 2017 at 4:11 AM, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 4.9.51 release. > There are 78 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. > >

Re: [PATCH 4.9 00/14] 4.9.50-stable review

On Tue, Sep 12, 2017 at 10:49 PM, Greg Kroah-Hartman <gre...@linuxfoundation.org> wrote: > On Tue, Sep 12, 2017 at 09:27:45PM -0500, Tom Gall wrote: >> >> > On Sep 12, 2017, at 11:58 AM, Greg Kroah-Hartman >> > <gre...@linuxfoundation.org> wrote: >&

Re: [PATCH 4.9 00/14] 4.9.50-stable review

On Tue, Sep 12, 2017 at 10:49 PM, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > On Tue, Sep 12, 2017 at 09:27:45PM -0500, Tom Gall wrote: >> >> > On Sep 12, 2017, at 11:58 AM, Greg Kroah-Hartman >> > wrote: >> >> Results from testing

Re: [PATCH 4.9 00/14] 4.9.50-stable review

> On Sep 12, 2017, at 11:58 AM, Greg Kroah-Hartman > wrote: > > This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 4.9.50 release. > There are 14 patches in this series, all will be posted as a response > to this one. If anyone has any issues with these being

Re: [PATCH 4.9 00/14] 4.9.50-stable review

> On Sep 12, 2017, at 11:58 AM, Greg Kroah-Hartman > wrote: > > This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 4.9.50 release. > There are 14 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.

Re: seccomp ptrace selftest failures with 4.4-stable [Was: Re: LTS testing with latest kselftests - some failures]

Hi Shuah, On Fri, Jun 23, 2017 at 2:03 PM, Shuah Khan <sh...@kernel.org> wrote: > On 06/22/2017 01:48 PM, Tom Gall wrote: >> Hi >> >> On Thu, Jun 22, 2017 at 2:06 PM, Shuah Khan <sh...@kernel.org> wrote: >>> On 06/22/2017 11:50 AM, Kees Cook wrote: &

Re: seccomp ptrace selftest failures with 4.4-stable [Was: Re: LTS testing with latest kselftests - some failures]

Hi Shuah, On Fri, Jun 23, 2017 at 2:03 PM, Shuah Khan wrote: > On 06/22/2017 01:48 PM, Tom Gall wrote: >> Hi >> >> On Thu, Jun 22, 2017 at 2:06 PM, Shuah Khan wrote: >>> On 06/22/2017 11:50 AM, Kees Cook wrote: >>>> On Thu, Jun 22, 2017 at 10:49 AM, An

Re: seccomp ptrace selftest failures with 4.4-stable [Was: Re: LTS testing with latest kselftests - some failures]

Hi On Thu, Jun 22, 2017 at 2:06 PM, Shuah Khan wrote: > On 06/22/2017 11:50 AM, Kees Cook wrote: >> On Thu, Jun 22, 2017 at 10:49 AM, Andy Lutomirski wrote: >>> On Thu, Jun 22, 2017 at 10:09 AM, Shuah Khan wrote: On 06/22/2017 10:53 AM,

Re: seccomp ptrace selftest failures with 4.4-stable [Was: Re: LTS testing with latest kselftests - some failures]

Hi On Thu, Jun 22, 2017 at 2:06 PM, Shuah Khan wrote: > On 06/22/2017 11:50 AM, Kees Cook wrote: >> On Thu, Jun 22, 2017 at 10:49 AM, Andy Lutomirski wrote: >>> On Thu, Jun 22, 2017 at 10:09 AM, Shuah Khan wrote: On 06/22/2017 10:53 AM, Kees Cook wrote: > On Thu, Jun 22, 2017 at 9:18

kselftest backports?

We've been running kselftests for ARM and x86 hardware in an effort to detect regressions in various kernels including LTS and candidate patches. One general question we've had is what's the right thing to do when it comes to running kselftest on older LTS kernels. Let's pick on 4.4 for the

kselftest backports?

We've been running kselftests for ARM and x86 hardware in an effort to detect regressions in various kernels including LTS and candidate patches. One general question we've had is what's the right thing to do when it comes to running kselftest on older LTS kernels. Let's pick on 4.4 for the

Re: runaway loop modprobe binfmt-0000

Hi Andrew, Thanks for the email back. Andrew Morton wrote: On Thu, 03 Jan 2008 12:18:19 -0600 Tom Gall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: This is an interesting one as I just hit this with a 2.6.23.12 kernel ... granted running on systemsim (the powerpc simulator) ... but as I'm hitting

Re: runaway loop modprobe binfmt-0000

Hi Andrew, Thanks for the email back. Andrew Morton wrote: On Thu, 03 Jan 2008 12:18:19 -0600 Tom Gall [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: This is an interesting one as I just hit this with a 2.6.23.12 kernel ... granted running on systemsim (the powerpc simulator) ... but as I'm hitting a wall I

Re: RFC: Changes for PCI

Richard Henderson wrote: > On Wed, Jun 27, 2001 at 02:07:37PM -0500, Tom Gall wrote: > > Consider also in drivers/pci/pci.c: > > > > The function pci_bus_exists checks based on bus numbers. This function is > > of course used by pci_alloc_primary_bus, which is in tu

Re: RFC: Changes for PCI

Richard Henderson wrote: On Wed, Jun 27, 2001 at 02:07:37PM -0500, Tom Gall wrote: Consider also in drivers/pci/pci.c: The function pci_bus_exists checks based on bus numbers. This function is of course used by pci_alloc_primary_bus, which is in turn used by pci_scan_bus. As is today

Re: RFC: Changes for PCI

Gérard Roudier wrote: > > On Wed, 27 Jun 2001, Jeff Garzik wrote: > > > Tom Gall wrote: > > > Well you have device drivers like the symbios scsi driver for instance that > > > tries to determine if it's seen a card before. It does this by looking at the > &g

Re: RFC: Changes for PCI

Gérard Roudier wrote: On Wed, 27 Jun 2001, Jeff Garzik wrote: Tom Gall wrote: Well you have device drivers like the symbios scsi driver for instance that tries to determine if it's seen a card before. It does this by looking at the bus,dev etc numbers... It's quite reasonable

Re: RFC: Changes for PCI

Jeff Garzik wrote: > Tom Gall wrote: > > Well you have device drivers like the symbios scsi driver for instance that > > tries to determine if it's seen a card before. It does this by looking at the > > bus,dev etc numbers... It's quite reasonable for two

Re: RFC: Changes for PCI

Jeff Garzik wrote: > > Tom Gall wrote: > > The first part changes number, primary, and secondary to unsigned ints from > > chars. What we do is encode the PCI "domain" aka PCI Primary Host Bridge, aka > > pci controller in with the bus

RFC: Changes for PCI

t;bus->ops->pci_fixup_registers != NULL) { + dev->bus->ops->pci_fixup_registers(dev); } /* We found a fine healthy device, go go go... */ So as Joel from MST3K used to say, "What do you think sirs?" Regards, Tom -- Tom Gall - PPC64 Maintainer &

RFC: Changes for PCI

? Regards, Tom -- Tom Gall - PPC64 Maintainer Where's the ka-boom? There was Linux Technology Center supposed to be an earth (w) [EMAIL PROTECTED] shattering ka-boom! (w) 507-253-4558 -- Marvin Martian (h) [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.ibm.com/linux/ltc/projects

Re: RFC: Changes for PCI

Jeff Garzik wrote: Tom Gall wrote: Well you have device drivers like the symbios scsi driver for instance that tries to determine if it's seen a card before. It does this by looking at the bus,dev etc numbers... It's quite reasonable for two different scsi cards to be on the same bus

Re: Going beyond 256 PCI buses

"Albert D. Cahalan" wrote: > > Tom Gall writes: > > > I was wondering if there are any other folks out there like me who > > have the 256 PCI bus limit looking at them straight in the face? > > I might. The need to reserve bus numbers for hot-plug look

Going beyond 256 PCI buses

Anyway, Hi All, I was wondering if there are any other folks out there like me who have the 256 PCI bus limit looking at them straight in the face? If so, it'd be nice to collaborate and come up with a more general solution that would hopefully work towards the greater good. I live in

Going beyond 256 PCI buses

Forgive if this is a dub... but the message I composed yesterday didn't appear to be posted Anyway, Hi All, I was wondering if there are any other folks out there like me who have the 256 PCI bus limit looking at them straight in the face? If so, it'd be nice to collaborate and come up with

Re: Going beyond 256 PCI buses

Albert D. Cahalan wrote: Tom Gall writes: I was wondering if there are any other folks out there like me who have the 256 PCI bus limit looking at them straight in the face? I might. The need to reserve bus numbers for hot-plug looks like a quick way to waste all 256 bus numbers

PATCH: New iSeries Device Drivers (small update)

were approved by hpa before the freeze so hopefully there isn't an issue with these drivers going in on that account. Thanks! Tom -- Tom Gall - PPC64 "Where's the ka-boom? There was Linux Technology Center supposed to be an earth (w) [EMAIL PROT

PATCH: New iSeries Device Drivers (small update)

were approved by hpa before the freeze so hopefully there isn't an issue with these drivers going in on that account. Thanks! Tom -- Tom Gall - PPC64 Where's the ka-boom? There was Linux Technology Center supposed to be an earth (w) [EMAIL PROTECTED

PATCH: New iSeries Device Drivers

to setup your own high speed lan "inside" of the box without consuming physical resources. Also see http://www.ibm.com/linux/ltc/projects/ppc/iSeries_notes.php or http://www.ibm.com/servers/eserver/iseries/linux/ for more information. Regards, Tom -- Tom Gall - PPC64

PATCH: New iSeries Device Drivers

to setup your own high speed lan inside of the box without consuming physical resources. Also see http://www.ibm.com/linux/ltc/projects/ppc/iSeries_notes.php or http://www.ibm.com/servers/eserver/iseries/linux/ for more information. Regards, Tom -- Tom Gall - PPC64 Where's the ka