On 29.05.24 23:12, Emanuele Rocca wrote:
> On 2024-05-27 02:31, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
>> Would also help a lot to know if this is a 6.8.y only thing, or happens
>> with 6.9 and mainline as well, as 6.8.y will likely be EOLed soon.
>
> I could reproduce the issue wit
On 30.05.24 10:45, Jörn Heusipp wrote:
>
> On 30/05/2024 09:27, Linux regression tracking (Thorsten Leemhuis) wrote:
>> On 30.05.24 08:55, Jörn Heusipp wrote:
>>> commit fbf6449f84bf5e4ad09f2c09ee70ed7d629b5ff6 ("x86/sev-es: Set
>>> x86_virt_bits to the c
On 30.05.24 08:55, Jörn Heusipp wrote:
>
> Hello x86 maintainers!
>
> commit fbf6449f84bf5e4ad09f2c09ee70ed7d629b5ff6 ("x86/sev-es: Set
> x86_virt_bits to the correct value straight away, instead of a two-phase
> approach") crashes during boot for me on this 32bit x86 system.
FWIW, not my area
On 27.05.24 14:22, Luca Boccassi wrote:
>> https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/autopkgtest/+bug/2056461
>
> This has been reported upstream 3 weeks ago, but so far it seems no
> action has been taken:
>
> https://lore.kernel.org/all/Zj0ErxVBE3DYT2Ea@gpd/
Hmmm, that thread is strange, why
TWIMC, the problem systemd is facing due to the removal of a obsolete
option (that might or might not lead to the problem this bug is about)
was finally properly reported upstream now – and from the first reply is
sounds like a workaround is likely to be expected:
On Sat, 18 May 2024 22:25:14 +0200 Matteo Settenvini
wrote:
>
> booting kernel 6.8.9-1 with dracut, systemd, and btrfs as the root device
> fails
> to mount the root partition. I just tried the kernel from sid and it seems
> indeed \
> affected. The 6.7 kernel from trixie is instead booting
On 08.03.24 02:08, Alex Constantino wrote:
> Fix OOM scenario by doing multiple notifications to the OOM handler through
> a busy wait logic.
> Changes from commit 5a838e5d5825 ("drm/qxl: simplify qxl_fence_wait") would
> result in a '[TTM] Buffer eviction failed' exception whenever it reached a
>
On 27.01.24 14:14, Salvatore Bonaccorso wrote:
>
> In Debian (https://bugs.debian.org/1061449) we got the following
> quotred report:
>
> On Wed, Jan 24, 2024 at 07:38:16PM +0100, Patrice Duroux wrote:
>>
>> Giving a try to 6.7, here is a message extracted from dmesg:
>> [4.177226]
Hi, Thorsten here, the Linux kernel's regression tracker. Top-posting
for once, to make this easily accessible to everyone.
Gerd, it seems this regression[1] fell through the cracks. Could you
please take a look? Or is there a good reason why this can't be
addressed? Or was it dealt with and I
On 12.09.23 00:57, Pablo Neira Ayuso wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 11, 2023 at 11:37:50PM +0200, Timo Sigurdsson wrote:
>>
>> recently, Debian updated their stable kernel from 6.1.38 to 6.1.52
>> which broke nftables ruleset loading on one of my machines with lots
>> of "Operation not supported" errors.
Hi!
On 02.08.23 23:28, Olaf Skibbe wrote:
> Dear Maintainers,
>
> Hereby I would like to report an apparent bug in the nouveau driver in
> linux/6.1.38-2.
Thx for your report. Maybe your problem is caused by a incomplete
backport. I Cced the maintainers for the drivers (and the regressions
and
On 27.06.23 00:34, Nick Hastings wrote:
> * Linux regression tracking (Thorsten Leemhuis)
> [230626 21:09]:
>> Hi, Thorsten here, the Linux kernel's regression tracker. Top-posting
>> for once, to make this easily accessible to everyone.
>>
>> Nick, what's the stat
Hi, Thorsten here, the Linux kernel's regression tracker. Top-posting
for once, to make this easily accessible to everyone.
Nick, what's the status/was there any progress? Did you do what Mario
suggested and file a nouveau bug?
I ask, as I still have this on my list of regressions and it seems
On 10.07.22 10:06, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
> On 04.07.22 11:40, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
>> TWIMC: this mail is primarily send for documentation purposes and for
>> regzbot, my Linux kernel regression tracking bot. These mails usually
>> contain '#forregzbot' in the subje
On 04.07.22 11:40, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
> TWIMC: this mail is primarily send for documentation purposes and for
> regzbot, my Linux kernel regression tracking bot. These mails usually
> contain '#forregzbot' in the subject, to make them easy to spot and filter.
>
> On
TWIMC: this mail is primarily send for documentation purposes and for
regzbot, my Linux kernel regression tracking bot. These mails usually
contain '#forregzbot' in the subject, to make them easy to spot and filter.
On 21.06.22 11:35, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
> [TLDR: I'm adding this regress
[TLDR: I'm adding this regression report to the list of tracked
regressions; all text from me you find below is based on a few templates
paragraphs you might have encountered already already in similar form.]
On 20.06.22 20:49, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> I've tested a 5.19-rc3 kernel on top of
On 21.03.22 19:49, Dominique Dumont wrote:
> On Monday, 21 March 2022 09:57:59 CET Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
>> Dominique/Salvatore/Eric, what's the status of this regression?
>> According to the debian bug tracker the problem is solved with 5.16 and
>> 5.17, but was 5.15 eve
On 21.03.22 13:07, Éric Valette wrote:
> My problem has never been fixed.
>
> The proposed patch has been applied to 5.15. I do not remerber which version
> 28 maybe.
>
> I still have à RIP in pm_suspend. Did not test the Last two 15 versions.
>
> I can leave with 5.10 est using own compiled
Hi, this is your Linux kernel regression tracker. Top-posting for once,
to make this easily accessible to everyone.
Dominique/Salvatore/Eric, what's the status of this regression?
According to the debian bug tracker the problem is solved with 5.16 and
5.17, but was 5.15 ever fixed?
Ciao,
[TLDR: I'm adding the regression report below to regzbot, the Linux
kernel regression tracking bot; all text you find below is compiled from
a few templates paragraphs you might have encountered already already
from similar mails.]
Hi, this is your Linux kernel regression tracker speaking.
21 matches
Mail list logo
