Hi all,
As usual, the executive friendly graph is at
http://neuling.org/linux-next-size.html :-)
(No merge commits counted, next-20190709 was the first linux-next after
the merge window opened.)
Commits in v5.3-rc1 (relative to v5.2):12608
Commits in next-20190709:
Hi, Thomas,
On Thu, 25 Jul 2019 at 10:37, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
>
> Duh. Yes, this explains it nicely.
>
> > [1.123548] clocksource: timekeeping watchdog on CPU1: Marking
> > clocksource 'tsc-early' as unstable because the skew is too large:
> > [1.123552] clocksource:
come up.
> With hpet=disabled…
>
> Linux 5.2:
> available_clocksource: tsc acpi_pm
> current_clocksource: tsc
>
> Linux 5.3-rc1 patched:
> available_clocksource: tsc acpi_pm
> current_clocksource: tsc
That's consistent with the above. 5.3-rc1 unpatched would of course boot as
well wit
Rui,
On Thu, 25 Jul 2019, Rui Salvaterra wrote:
> Looks like we have a winner. Actually, I did a full bisection between
> 5.2 and 5.3-rc1. Full log follows:
>
> git bisect start
> # good: [0ecfebd2b52404ae0c54a878c872bb93363ada36] Linux 5.2
> git bisect good
which always worked perfectly
> > with Linux 5.2 using the TSC as the clock source. With Linux 5.3-rc1 I
> > can't, for the life of me, boot it with anything other than
> > clocksource=jiffies, it completely hangs without even a backtrace.
>
> The obvious candidate for this
Rui,
On Wed, 24 Jul 2019, Rui Salvaterra wrote:
> I don't know if this has been reported before, but from a cursory
> search it doesn't seem to be the case.
> I have a x86-64 Pentium (4) D machine which always worked perfectly
> with Linux 5.2 using the TSC as the clock source. With L
Hi, everyone,
I don't know if this has been reported before, but from a cursory
search it doesn't seem to be the case.
I have a x86-64 Pentium (4) D machine which always worked perfectly
with Linux 5.2 using the TSC as the clock source. With Linux 5.3-rc1 I
can't, for the life of me, boot
On Tue, Jul 23, 2019 at 09:23:34AM -0700, James Bottomley wrote:
> On Tue, 2019-07-23 at 09:19 -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> > On Tue, Jul 23, 2019 at 08:33:15AM -0700, James Bottomley wrote:
> > [ ... ]
> > >
> > > Yes, I think so. Can someone try this, or something like it.
> > >
> > >
On 7/23/19 6:19 PM, Guenter Roeck wrote:
On Tue, Jul 23, 2019 at 08:33:15AM -0700, James Bottomley wrote:
[ ... ]
Yes, I think so. Can someone try this, or something like it.
Thanks,
James
---
diff --git a/drivers/scsi/scsi_lib.c b/drivers/scsi/scsi_lib.c
index 9381171c2fc0..4715671a1537
On Tue, 2019-07-23 at 09:19 -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 23, 2019 at 08:33:15AM -0700, James Bottomley wrote:
> [ ... ]
> >
> > Yes, I think so. Can someone try this, or something like it.
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > James
> >
> > ---
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/scsi/scsi_lib.c
On Tue, Jul 23, 2019 at 08:33:15AM -0700, James Bottomley wrote:
[ ... ]
>
> Yes, I think so. Can someone try this, or something like it.
>
> Thanks,
>
> James
>
> ---
>
> diff --git a/drivers/scsi/scsi_lib.c b/drivers/scsi/scsi_lib.c
> index 9381171c2fc0..4715671a1537 100644
> ---
On Tue, Jul 23, 2019 at 05:34:21PM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> Does this fix the problem for you?
>
> diff --git a/drivers/scsi/scsi_lib.c b/drivers/scsi/scsi_lib.c
> index 9381171c2fc0..4715671a1537 100644
> --- a/drivers/scsi/scsi_lib.c
> +++ b/drivers/scsi/scsi_lib.c
> @@ -1793,7 +1793,8
On Tue, Jul 23, 2019 at 08:14:21AM -0700, James Bottomley wrote:
> On Tue, 2019-07-23 at 07:58 -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> > On Tue, Jul 23, 2019 at 07:48:41AM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > > The fix was sent last morning my time:
> > >
> > >
On Tue, Jul 23, 2019 at 05:34:21PM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> Does this fix the problem for you?
>
I'll try. Give me a couple of hours.
Guenter
> diff --git a/drivers/scsi/scsi_lib.c b/drivers/scsi/scsi_lib.c
> index 9381171c2fc0..4715671a1537 100644
> --- a/drivers/scsi/scsi_lib.c
>
Does this fix the problem for you?
diff --git a/drivers/scsi/scsi_lib.c b/drivers/scsi/scsi_lib.c
index 9381171c2fc0..4715671a1537 100644
--- a/drivers/scsi/scsi_lib.c
+++ b/drivers/scsi/scsi_lib.c
@@ -1793,7 +1793,8 @@ void __scsi_init_queue(struct Scsi_Host *shost, struct
request_queue *q)
On Tue, 2019-07-23 at 16:25 +0200, Steffen Maier wrote:
> On 7/23/19 7:28 AM, James Bottomley wrote:
> > On Mon, 2019-07-22 at 19:42 -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> > > On 7/22/19 4:45 PM, James Bottomley wrote:
> > > > [linux-scsi added to cc]
> > > > On Mon, 2019-07-22 at 15:21 -0700, Guenter
On Tue, 2019-07-23 at 07:58 -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 23, 2019 at 07:48:41AM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > The fix was sent last morning my time:
> >
> > https://marc.info/?l=linux-scsi=156378725427719=2
>
> Here is the updated bisect for the ppc scsi problem.
>
> Guenter
On Tue, Jul 23, 2019 at 07:48:41AM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> The fix was sent last morning my time:
>
> https://marc.info/?l=linux-scsi=156378725427719=2
Here is the updated bisect for the ppc scsi problem.
Guenter
---
# bad: [f65420df914a85e33b2c8b1cab310858b2abb7c0] Merge tag
On 7/23/19 7:28 AM, James Bottomley wrote:
On Mon, 2019-07-22 at 19:42 -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote:
On 7/22/19 4:45 PM, James Bottomley wrote:
[linux-scsi added to cc]
On Mon, 2019-07-22 at 15:21 -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote:
On Sun, Jul 21, 2019 at 02:33:38PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
[ ...
On 7/22/19 10:48 PM, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
The fix was sent last morning my time:
https://marc.info/?l=linux-scsi=156378725427719=2
That patch does not fix the problem observed with sata-sii3112.
It does, however, fix the problem observed with riscv64, suggesting
some interaction between
The fix was sent last morning my time:
https://marc.info/?l=linux-scsi=156378725427719=2
On Mon, 2019-07-22 at 19:42 -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> On 7/22/19 4:45 PM, James Bottomley wrote:
> > [linux-scsi added to cc]
> > On Mon, 2019-07-22 at 15:21 -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> > > On Sun, Jul 21, 2019 at 02:33:38PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> > >
> > > [ ... ]
> > > >
> > > >
On 7/22/19 4:45 PM, James Bottomley wrote:
[linux-scsi added to cc]
On Mon, 2019-07-22 at 15:21 -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote:
On Sun, Jul 21, 2019 at 02:33:38PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
[ ... ]
Go test,
Things looked pretty good until a few days ago. Unfortunately,
the last few days
[linux-scsi added to cc]
On Mon, 2019-07-22 at 15:21 -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 21, 2019 at 02:33:38PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>
> [ ... ]
> >
> > Go test,
> >
>
> Things looked pretty good until a few days ago. Unfortunately,
> the last few days brought in a couple of
On Sun, Jul 21, 2019 at 02:33:38PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
[ ... ]
>
> Go test,
>
Things looked pretty good until a few days ago. Unfortunately,
the last few days brought in a couple of issues.
riscv:virt:defconfig:scsi[virtio]
riscv:virt:defconfig:scsi[virtio-pci]
Boot tests crash with
Here we go Linus! :)
On 14:33 Sun 21 Jul , Linus Torvalds wrote:
It's been two weeks, and the merge window is over, and Linux 5.3-rc1
is tagged and pushed out.
This is a pretty big release, judging by the commit count. Not the
biggest ever (that honor still goes to 4.9-rc1, which
It's been two weeks, and the merge window is over, and Linux 5.3-rc1
is tagged and pushed out.
This is a pretty big release, judging by the commit count. Not the
biggest ever (that honor still goes to 4.9-rc1, which was
exceptionally big), and we've had a couple of comparable ones (4.12,
4.15
The pull request you sent on Fri, 12 Jul 2019 12:07:27 -0600:
> git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/shuah/linux-kselftest
> tags/linux-kselftest-5.3-rc1
has been merged into torvalds/linux.git:
https://git.kernel.org/torvalds/c/8487d8229990e6eacaf1c854a113c9d16b7b596c
Thank you!
--
Hi Linus,
Please pull the following Kselftest update for Linux 5.3-rc1.
This Kselftest update for Linux 5.3-rc1 consists of build failure
fixes and minor code cleaning patch to remove duplicate headers.
diff is attached.
thanks,
-- Shuah
29 matches
Mail list logo
