Re: [OS-BUILD PATCH] Redhat: enable Kfence on production servers

On Tue, Apr 19, 2022 at 7:48 AM Bruno Goncalves (via Email Bridge) wrote: > > From: Bruno Goncalves on gitlab.com > https://gitlab.com/cki-project/kernel-ark/-/merge_requests/1748#note_916697510 > > @npache I used to bot to test this MR, but it failed to build for x86_64: > https://gitlab.com/redh

Re: gcc: error: unrecognized command-line option '-mharden-sls=all'

On Thu, Apr 21, 2022 at 8:58 AM Sérgio Basto wrote: > > Hi, > > to test Virtualbox host kmods on new kernel (x86_64 only), I install > fedora-rawhide-kernel-nodebug [1] > > but last two update I see with ack SLS [2] but SLS is strict arm thing > , this is a bug ? or I'm missing something ? SLS is

Re: gcc: error: unrecognized command-line option '-mharden-sls=all'

On Thu, Apr 21, 2022 at 12:02 PM Sérgio Basto wrote: > > On Thu, 2022-04-21 at 11:50 -0500, Justin Forbes wrote: > > On Thu, Apr 21, 2022 at 8:58 AM Sérgio Basto wrote: > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > to test Virtualbox host kmods on new kernel (x86

The kernel-ark os-build branch has been rebased

As we have done since 5.15, we have done this again for os-build, we expect to keep it up as a cadence with every upstream release. This means we will do it again when 5.19 releases, and again with 5.20... It is difficult to manage a regularly rebased tree, because any outstanding MR is invalidated

Fedora and the 5.18 kernel

The fedora-5.18 branch has not been created in the kernel-ark repository. The kernel test week for 5.18 will be June 5th - June 11th, and the rebase for Fedora 35 and 36 will be shortly after that, pending the results of test week. As Fedora 34 will already be EOL, it will not get a 5.18 rebase.

Re: Getting 'modpost: "cc_mkenc" [...] undefined!' when compiling out of tree kernel module

On Thu, Jun 9, 2022 at 3:39 AM Mauro Moltrasio wrote: > > Hi everyone, > > I'm new here so I'm sorry if this is not the right place to ask about this. > > I'm trying to build a kernel module based on this repo > https://github.com/stackrox/falcosecurity-libs/tree/master/driver using the > kernel

Re: Any chance that the Intel ipu6-driver comes into the kernel?

On Tue, Jun 28, 2022 at 8:47 AM Dennis Pries wrote: > > Hi all, > currently the intel IPU6 based cameras are unsupported. This cameras are used > in the tiger lake and alder lake platforms. > > Ubuntu made changes to support them: > https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux-firmware/+bug/19

Re: Latest rawhide kernel, kernel-5.19.0-0.rc6.20220714git4a57a8400075.49.fc37.src.rpm, builds but won't boot

On Sun, Jul 17, 2022 at 4:17 PM stan via kernel wrote: > > On Sun, 17 Jul 2022 11:40:14 -0700 > stan wrote: > > > I'll be building the rc6 kernel with the new option enabled to see if > > that fixes things, but the kernel should still run even if the > > automatic mitigation is turned off. Shoul

Re: Latest rawhide kernel, kernel-5.19.0-0.rc6.20220714git4a57a8400075.49.fc37.src.rpm, builds but won't boot

On Tue, Jul 19, 2022 at 3:43 PM stan via kernel wrote: > > On Mon, 18 Jul 2022 11:57:08 -0700 > stan via kernel wrote: > > > Found the problem. There is a mismatch in the file name. > > The kernel should be looking for > > /usr/lib/systemd/libsystemd-core-251.3-1.fc37.so > > not > > /usr/lib/sys

F37 and unfortunate timing (a heads up)

Fedora 37 does not branch from Rawhide until August 9th, and the 5.20 merge window will open up on August 1, that puts us in a bit of an odd situation. Fedora 37 will release on a 5.19 kernel because 5.20 is not expected to release before the final freeze begins. I don't think it would be wise to

5.18.14 and fedora

I am not building 5,18.14 for Fedora, This is the upstream retbleed fix for stable. We have been carrying most of those patches since 5.18.11, and the last of them were picked up with the 5.18.13 build. The only thing in the upstream 5.18.14 build that is not in our 5.18.13 build is the version bu

Re: Unable build kernel locally because command fedpkg mockbuild failed with error "Empty %files file /builddir/build/BUILD/kernel-5.19-rc8-17-g39c3c396f813/debugfiles.list"

On Wed, Jul 27, 2022 at 6:53 PM Mikhail Gavrilov wrote: > > Unable build kernel locally because command fedpkg mockbuild failed with > error "Empty %files file > /builddir/build/BUILD/kernel-5.19-rc8-17-g39c3c396f813/debugfiles.list" > > Full build log: https://pastebin.com/48ZYg3XQ > > I also t

Re: What purpose does the redhat/Makefile "MARKER is" line serve?

On Thu, Jul 28, 2022 at 9:53 AM Prarit Bhargava wrote: > > $subject essentially. Does it actually serve any purpose. I know its > been there a long time but I'm not sure if it serves any actual purpose > anymore other than creating noise in the output. > > The line itself is output from redhat/g

The kernel-ark os-build branch has been rebased

As we have done since 5.15, we have done this again for os-build, we expect to keep it up as a cadence with every upstream release. This means we will do it again when 6.0 releases, and again with 6.1... It is difficult to manage a regularly rebased tree, because any outstanding MR is invalidated a

Fedora and 5.19

The initial fedora-5.19 branch has been created in kernel-ark. As I mentioned earlier, F37 will branch a 6.0 merge window kernel, but that will be replaced with 5.19 as soon as possible. We will also do stabilization for the 5.19 branch and hope to rebase Fedora 35 and 36 to 5.19 in a timely manne

Re: Fedora and 5.19

On Thu, Aug 4, 2022 at 5:44 AM Peter Robinson wrote: > > On Thu, Aug 4, 2022 at 11:35 AM Hans de Goede wrote: > > > > Hi, > > > > On 8/2/22 22:15, Justin Forbes wrote: > > > The initial fedora-5.19 branch has been created in kernel-ark. As I > > >

Re: Fedora and 5.19

On Thu, Aug 4, 2022 at 9:04 AM Justin Forbes wrote: > > On Thu, Aug 4, 2022 at 5:44 AM Peter Robinson wrote: > > > > On Thu, Aug 4, 2022 at 11:35 AM Hans de Goede wrote: > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > On 8/2/22 22:15, Justin Forbes wrote: >

Re: [PATCH 0/3] pre-generated initrd and unified kernels

On Thu, Sep 1, 2022 at 9:58 AM Daniel P. Berrangé wrote: > > On Thu, Sep 01, 2022 at 10:37:03AM -0400, Prarit Bhargava wrote: > > Hey Gerd, > > > > Thanks for this changeset. > > > > On 8/31/22 08:46, Gerd Hoffmann wrote: > > >Hi, > > > > > > Here is a little patch series to kick off a discuss

Re: [PATCH 0/3] pre-generated initrd and unified kernels

On Wed, Sep 21, 2022 at 4:48 AM Gerd Hoffmann wrote: > > Hi, > > > > Should we have a Fedora feature page for unified kernel support? > > > > I'm not sure we especially want to publicise unified kernel images as > > a standalone thing to users, as it is more of just a building block. > > > > If

The kernel-ark os-build branch has been rebased

Please rebase any pending MRs and repush. As we have done since 5.15, we have done this again for os-build, we expect to keep it up as a cadence with every upstream release. This means we will do it again when 6.1 releases, and again with 6.2... It is difficult to manage a regularly rebased tree,

Re: Plans for MGLRU?

On Thu, Oct 13, 2022 at 6:11 AM Bruno Wolff III wrote: > > Are you guys thinking of enabling MGLRU soon? Yes, config options for Fedora typically get set somewhere between rc3 and rc7, with bigger changes earlier in the cycle and more of the small drivers set later. I do intend to flip MGLRU on t

Re: pending CONFIGs and MRs to review

On Sun, Oct 16, 2022 at 9:43 AM Prarit Bhargava wrote: > > Hey ptalbert and jforbes, > > I'm writing a script that will automate some of the CS9/RHEL CONFIG reviews. > > One thing I'm doing in the script is comparing the CS9/RHEL CONFIG value > to the ARK value. If they match then the scripts pas

Re: pending CONFIGs and MRs to review

On Mon, Oct 17, 2022 at 6:08 PM Prarit Bhargava wrote: > > > > While this does sound useful, it means we must create the commits, > > push to create an MR, then immediately go back and edit the commits > > because we have an MR number now. This link would be short lived as > > it would go away on

Re: [PATCH 0/3] pre-generated initrd and unified kernels

On Sat, Nov 26, 2022 at 9:54 AM Hans de Goede wrote: > > Hi, > > On 11/25/22 11:40, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > > Hi! The following is all nitpicking. I hope it won't cause a > > bikeshedding discussion, I'm not going to fight for any of this, I just > > want to get it of my chest. > > Sorry, I do

The kernel-ark os-build branch has been rebased

Please rebase any pending MRs and repush. As we have done since 5.15, we have done this again for os-build, we expect to keep it up as a cadence with every upstream release. This means we will do it again when 6.2 releases, and again with 6.3... It is difficult to manage a regularly rebased tree,

Rawhide and debug kernels

For a *very* long time, Rawhide has built rcX kernels as "release" kernels and daily git snapshots as debug kernels only. This has brought attention to some issues that might otherwise be missed. Specifically around things like lockdep. Unfortunately, even without changing our selected debug opt

Re: Rawhide and debug kernels

On Thu, Jan 26, 2023 at 4:39 PM Bruno Wolff III wrote: > > I'm not too great at figuring how you tell which is which from the build > process, but there was a comment in a kernel build today that suggests > that things have changed so that now rawhide kernels are nodebug by default. > Is that corr

Rawhide and debug kernel changes

As the MR is now merged, it is a good time to make sure that everyone is aware. As of 6.2-rc5, Rawhide is no longer forcing a debug build with any kernels. All rawhide kernels are now built just like stable Fedora kernels, with both non-debug and debug variations. This change was necessary becaus

Re: Rawhide and debug kernel changes

On Fri, Feb 3, 2023 at 6:52 AM Dan Horák wrote: > > On Thu, 2 Feb 2023 14:17:36 -0600 > Justin Forbes wrote: > > > As the MR is now merged, it is a good time to make sure that everyone > > is aware. As of 6.2-rc5, Rawhide is no longer forcing a debug build > >

Re: Rawhide Kconfig changes late in the -rc cycle

On Fri, Feb 10, 2023 at 11:28 AM Paul Moore wrote: > > On Fri, Feb 10, 2023 at 12:15 PM Paul Moore wrote: > > > > Hi Fedora Kernel People, > > > > The SELinux folks recently stumbled across some test failures due to a > > change in the Rawhide kernel config that happened this week while we > > ar

Re: Rawhide Kconfig changes late in the -rc cycle

On Sat, Feb 11, 2023 at 1:37 AM Ondrej Mosnáček wrote: > > On Fri, Feb 10, 2023 at 9:10 PM Justin Forbes wrote: > > > > On Fri, Feb 10, 2023 at 11:28 AM Paul Moore wrote: > > > > > > On Fri, Feb 10, 2023 at 12:15 PM Paul Moore wrote: > > > > >

The kernel-ark os-build branch has been rebased

Please rebase any pending MRs and repush. As we have done since 5.15, we have done this again for os-build, we expect to keep it up as a cadence with every upstream release. This means we will do it again when 6.3 releases, and again with 6.4... It is difficult to manage a regularly rebased tree,

Re: Building custom kernel using rpmbuild with spec file gives error on cpufreq.h Is it meaningful?

On Sun, Mar 5, 2023 at 12:48 PM stan via kernel wrote: > > Hi, > I just built a kernel from the 6.2.2 fc37 src.rpm. It built fine, but > at the end there was a missing file warning for cpufreq.h. I build the > header files when building the kernel, so I would think that would be > included in th

Re: soname bump: libtraceevent and libtracefs

On Wed, Apr 5, 2023 at 5:05 AM Zamir SUN wrote: > > Hi, > > I'm working on libtraceevent and libtracefs update. There will be soname > bump happening to them. Namely, > > libtraceevent.so 1.6.3 -> 1.7.2 > libtracefs.so 1.5.0 -> 1.6.4 > > IIRC only kernel-tools (for perf and rtla) and trace-cmd dep

Re: soname bump: libtraceevent and libtracefs

onday, that way it will automatically follow into stable Fedora as they get the 6.3 rebase. Justin > John Kacur > > On Sun, Apr 9, 2023 at 12:12 AM Zamir SUN wrote: >> >> >> On 4/5/23 23:49, Justin Forbes wrote: >> > On Wed, Apr 5, 2023 at 5:05 AM Zamir

The kernel-ark os-build branch has been rebased

Please rebase any pending MRs and repush. As we have done since 5.15, we have done this again for os-build, we expect to keep it up as a cadence with every upstream release. This means we will do it again when 6.4 releases, and again with 6.3... It is difficult to manage a regularly rebased tree,

Re: RHEL9 & ark commit 4419eb4efd6d ("kernel.spec.template: Add global compression variables")

On Wed, May 3, 2023 at 7:12 AM Prarit Bhargava wrote: > > ark commit 4419eb4efd6d ("kernel.spec.template: Add global compression > variables") looks like it broke the weak-modules script. The > weak-modules script expects a gzip'd symvers file, not an xz'd one. > > Working on a fix for the weak-m

Re: CONFIG_NFT_CONNLIMIT is not set

On Wed, May 17, 2023 at 9:37 AM Steve Bennett wrote: > > Hi, > > Is there a reason why CONFIG_NFT_CONNLIMIT is not set in default Fedora > kernels? > I think there was a problem with it in early kernel 4.19, but that was quite > a while ago, and as it stands it seems that documented functionalit

Re: What is the current procedure to patch the kernel in the spec file?

On Wed, May 31, 2023 at 1:10 PM stan via kernel wrote: > > It has been ages since I wanted to patch the kernel when I built a > custom kernel. I tried putting the patch in the spec file where the > other patches were, but it doesn't apply. There is no error, or even > indication that it saw the

The kernel-ark os-build branch has been rebased

Please rebase any pending MRs and repush. As we have done since 5.15, we have done this again for os-build, we expect to keep it up as a cadence with every upstream release. This means we will do it again when 6.5 releases, and again with 6.6... It is difficult to manage a regularly rebased tree,

The kernel-ark os-build branch has been rebased

Please rebase any pending MRs and repush. As we have done since 5.15, we have done this again for os-build, we expect to keep it up as a cadence with every upstream release. This means we will do it again when 6.6 releases, and again with 6.7... It is difficult to manage a regularly rebased tree,

The kernel-ark os-build branch has been rebased

Please rebase any pending MRs and repush. As we have done since 5.15, we have done this again for os-build, we expect to keep it up as a cadence with every upstream release. This means we will do it again when 6.7 releases, and again with 6.8... It is difficult to manage a regularly rebased tree,

The kernel-ark os-build branch has been rebased

Please rebase any pending MRs and repush. As we have done since 5.15, we have done this again for os-build, we expect to keep it up as a cadence with every upstream release. This means we will do it again when 6.8 releases, and again with 6.9... It is difficult to manage a regularly rebased tree,

Re: asking for help on i686 kernel problem v2

On Tue, Mar 5, 2024 at 7:10 AM Sérgio Basto wrote: > > On Tue, 2024-03-05 at 07:59 -0500, Prarit Bhargava wrote: > > On 3/4/24 11:49, Sérgio Basto wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > > > We can't build webkitgtk on i686 lately. > > > > > > webkitgtk is in critical path and break rawhide composes, if fail > >

Where is jforbes (kernel maintainer) for the next 4-8 weeks?

Unfortunately I will be out on medical leave for the next 4-8 weeks. Augusto Caringi (acaringi) has been doing a great job with the fedora stable kernel releases recently and will be the point of contact for fedora kernel issues in my absence. Other good points of contact include Peter Robinson (

Re: Where is jforbes (kernel maintainer) for the next 4-8 weeks?

On Wed, Mar 6, 2024 at 3:20 PM Dan Horák wrote: > > Hi Justin, > > On Wed, 6 Mar 2024 14:50:57 -0600 > Justin Forbes wrote: > > > Unfortunately I will be out on medical leave for the next 4-8 weeks. > > Augusto Caringi (acaringi) has been doing a great job wit

The kernel-ark os-build branch has been rebased

Please rebase any pending MRs and repush. As we have done since 5.15, we have done this again for os-build, we expect to keep it up as a cadence with every upstream release. This means we will do it again when 6.10 releases, and again with 6.11... It is difficult to manage a regularly rebased tree

Re: kernel package not build in mock environment anymore

On Sat, Jun 1, 2024 at 3:08 AM Mikhail Gavrilov wrote: > > Something broke in the build environment > I can't build the kernel package in the mock environment for two days. > I attached an archived build log here. I saw no build log attached. What kernel version were you trying to build, and whi

Re: Building upstream kernel with Fedora config

On Thu, Jun 6, 2024 at 9:19 AM Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > > [CCing Justin] > > On 04.06.24 18:12, Mikhail Gavrilov wrote: > > > Instruction [1] about building upstream kernel should be updated, > > I'd tend to disagree. I think the root of the problem should be fixed, > which you... > > > because

The kernel-ark os-build branch has been rebased

Please rebase any pending MRs and repush. As we have done since 5.15, we have done this again for os-build, we expect to keep it up as a cadence with every upstream release. This means we will do it again when 6.11 releases, and again with 6.12... It is difficult to manage a regularly rebased tree

Re: Differences between Fedora-built kernel and self-built kernel on Fedora?

On Thu, Sep 5, 2024 at 5:16 AM Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > > This is a bit of a weird one ... > > Attempting to reproduce and fix this bug: > > https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=219166 > > which involves booting a qemu VM with the kernel and observing a > fairly rare, but reproducible

The kernel-ark os-build branch has been rebased

Please rebase any pending MRs and repush. As we have done since 5.15, we have done this again for os-build, we expect to keep it up as a cadence with every upstream release. This means we will do it again when 6.12 releases, and again with 6.13... It is difficult to manage a regularly rebased tree

Re: [OS-BUILD PATCH 0/2] Number patches more nicely

On Wed, Aug 12, 2020 at 2:26 AM GitLab Bridge on behalf of Ondrej Mosnáček wrote: > > From: Ondrej Mosnáček on gitlab.com > https://gitlab.com/cki-project/kernel-ark/-/merge_requests/491#note_394605693 > > @jmflinuxtx Ping... So is using `Patch0` OK for you or do you want me to > keep the `Patch1`

Re: Patches for Stabilization (5.8)

On Wed, Aug 12, 2020 at 6:30 AM Pablo Sebastián Greco wrote: > > Just as last time, I'd like to have these CKI patches backported to > stabilization, so it can build under CentOS/RHEL > > https://gitlab.com/cki-project/kernel-ark/-/commit/64ea06b285bff6fc625cf1571ae399149592c2c6 > https://gitlab.c

5.8 and other Fedora kernel bits

We are exiting a weird period that pops up every couple of years, so I figured I would explain what the current status is on a few things. The 5.8 kernel will be the release kernel for Fedora 33. Yes, 5.9 will likely be out when Fedora 33 releases, but current projections would put 5.9 on October

Re: 5.8 and other Fedora kernel bits

On Wed, Aug 12, 2020 at 9:49 AM Neal Gompa wrote: > > On Wed, Aug 12, 2020 at 10:35 AM Justin Forbes wrote: > > > > We are exiting a weird period that pops up every couple of years, so I > > figured I would explain what the current status is on a few things. > >

Re: 5.8 and other Fedora kernel bits

On Wed, Aug 12, 2020 at 10:35 AM Neal Gompa wrote: > > On Wed, Aug 12, 2020 at 11:31 AM Justin Forbes wrote: > > > > On Wed, Aug 12, 2020 at 9:49 AM Neal Gompa wrote: > > > > > > On Wed, Aug 12, 2020 at 10:35 AM Justin Forbes > > > wrote: >

Re: [OS-BUILD PATCH 1/3] redhat/Makefile: Fix '*-configs' targets

On Mon, Aug 24, 2020 at 9:25 AM Prarit Bhargava wrote: > > On 8/24/20 9:49 AM, Don Zickus wrote: > > On Sat, Aug 22, 2020 at 06:56:29AM -0400, Prarit Bhargava wrote: > >>> and final files are not tagged with 'rhel'. > >> > >> That's the current way dist-configs does things. I debated adding a ren

Re: Fedora kernels >= 5.8 have xhci-pci build as a module

On Wed, Sep 2, 2020 at 12:20 PM Hans de Goede wrote: > > Hi, > > On 9/2/20 5:34 PM, Peter Robinson wrote: > > On Wed, Sep 2, 2020 at 4:08 PM Hans de Goede wrote: > >> > >> Hi All, > >> > >> 5.8 introduces a new CONFIG_USB_XHCI_PCI_RENESAS Kconfig symbol. > >> > >> The current Fedora kernel config

Re: [OS-BUILD PATCH] kernel.spec: don't override upstream compiler flags for ppc64le

On Mon, Sep 7, 2020 at 10:07 AM GitLab Bridge on behalf of sharkcz wrote: > > From: =?UTF-8?q?Dan=20Hor=C3=A1k?= > > Related: rhbz#1866485 > > Signed-off-by: Dan Horák Acked-by: Justin Forbes > --- > redhat/kernel.spec.template | 1 - > 1 file changed, 1 deletion

Re: PATCH: 5.8 Asus laptop regression fix

On Thu, Sep 17, 2020 at 4:57 AM Hans de Goede wrote: > > Hi, > > As mentioned in my other email, the 5.8 kernels have a nasty regression > causing the builtin keyboard and touchpad to not work on many Asus laptops. > > As I'm not entirely sure how to add the patch fixing this, I have > attached th

Re: Guidance regarding BUG 1821946

On Tue, Sep 22, 2020 at 4:00 AM Peter Robinson wrote: > > On Tue, Sep 22, 2020 at 12:04 AM Paulo Edgar Castro > wrote: > > > > Hi folks, > > > > Any ETA on this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1821946 > > > > or guidance regarding this > > > > ``` > > > > [root@localhost ~]# dnf i

Re: System no longer distributes load to multiple cores for long running task

On Thu, Sep 24, 2020 at 4:34 AM Florian Weimer wrote: > > * Chris Murphy: > > > On Wed, Sep 23, 2020 at 1:44 PM stan wrote: > > > > For what it's worth, gmail puts your emails into spam because of the > > your domain's DMARC policy: > > > > > > Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; > >ar

Re: System no longer distributes load to multiple cores for long running task

On Thu, Sep 24, 2020 at 6:35 AM Florian Weimer wrote: > > * Justin Forbes: > > > On Thu, Sep 24, 2020 at 4:34 AM Florian Weimer wrote: > >> > >> * Chris Murphy: > >> > >> > On Wed, Sep 23, 2020 at 1:44 PM stan wrote: > >> > >

Re: System no longer distributes load to multiple cores for long running task

On Thu, Sep 24, 2020 at 9:26 AM stan wrote: > > On Thu, 24 Sep 2020 06:42:00 -0500 > Justin Forbes wrote: > > > On Thu, Sep 24, 2020 at 6:35 AM Florian Weimer > > wrote: > > > > > > * Justin Forbes: > > > > > > >

Re: System no longer distributes load to multiple cores for long running task

On Thu, Sep 24, 2020 at 9:47 AM Kevin Fenzi wrote: > > On Thu, Sep 24, 2020 at 09:35:48AM -0500, Justin Forbes wrote: > > > Whether or not your emails get to the list is completely different > > from whether or not they get to any given list subscriber's mailbox. >

Re: Test reply Re: System no longer distributes load to multiple cores for long running task

On Thu, Sep 24, 2020 at 11:50 AM Jiri Benc wrote: > > On Thu, 24 Sep 2020 09:17:22 -0700, stan via kernel wrote: > > This is a test reply to see if the setting change worked. Will post > > whether I receive the email or not. I am assuming that 1 hr is enough > > time to propagate the change. > >

Re: Test reply Re: System no longer distributes load to multiple cores for long running task

On Thu, Sep 24, 2020 at 12:12 PM Jiri Benc wrote: > > On Thu, 24 Sep 2020 18:49:42 +0200, Jiri Benc wrote: > > Justin, please revert this change. Now every email appears as being sent > > by . Meaning the information about the > > author of email is lost, it's impossible to reply all, etc. > > I h

Re: Problem building kernel 5.9 rc6 from src.rpm when perf enabled, looks to be a script error, a typo

On Mon, Sep 28, 2020 at 10:38 AM stan via kernel wrote: > > I sent part of this to the devel list by mistake, correcting and > sending to the kernel list. > > Hi, > > When building the kernel with perf enabled from the src.rpm > kernel-5.9.0-0.rc6.20200925git171d4ff79f96.17.fc34.src.rpm > I get an

Re: [OS-BUILD PATCH] Set SquashFS decompression options for all flavors to match RHEL

el@lists.fedoraproject.org/thread/4M6WYFOZAZYIEVNZTBVM2BTT7SIEZBNQ/ > There you can find an excerpt from Linux documentation for the changed > options. > > I found the disparity while working on Fedora change proposal: > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/OptimizeSquashFS This looks good, than

Re: [OS-BUILD PATCH] Combine Red Hat patches into single patch

On Tue, Oct 6, 2020 at 1:49 AM Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > > Lo! > > Am 05.10.20 um 22:36 schrieb GitLab Bridge on behalf of dzickusrh: > > From: Don Zickus > > > > This in spirit reverts 0409b218390b564c44dd0181c5d0fe177d4c6bc3 > > and converts the broken out Red Hat patches back into a single di

Re: [OS-BUILD PATCH] Combine Red Hat patches into single patch

On Tue, Oct 6, 2020 at 8:43 AM Don Zickus wrote: > > On Tue, Oct 06, 2020 at 07:12:44AM -0500, Justin Forbes wrote: > > > Would be nice if those could be links to the commits in question, > > > as that makes it easy to look at them. How about something like this: > >

Re: [OS-BUILD PATCH] configs: Disable CONFIG_SECURITY_SELINUX_DISABLE

On Thu, Oct 8, 2020 at 5:31 AM GitLab Bridge on behalf of omos wrote: > > From: Ondrej Mosnacek > > The functionality has been deprecated upstream, so let's disable it > procatively in Fedora to not delay the inevitable. We are ready to > inherit this in RHEL-9, so do the change directly in > red

Re: [OS-BUILD PATCH] configs: Disable CONFIG_SECURITY_SELINUX_DISABLE

On Thu, Oct 8, 2020 at 10:00 AM Ondrej Mosnacek wrote: > > On Thu, Oct 8, 2020 at 2:32 PM Justin Forbes wrote: > > On Thu, Oct 8, 2020 at 5:31 AM GitLab Bridge on behalf of omos > > wrote: > > > > > > From: Ondrej Mosnacek > > > > > > Th

Re: [OS-BUILD PATCH] configs: Disable CONFIG_SECURITY_SELINUX_DISABLE

On Thu, Oct 8, 2020 at 10:26 AM Jiri Benc wrote: > > On Thu, 8 Oct 2020 10:10:31 -0500, Justin Forbes wrote: > > It has been on my radar since FESCo approved it, but please leave the > > MR open, as it is also a RHEL change, this needs acks. I was just > > pointing ou

Re: Linux 5.9 and speakup (a11y)

On Sun, Oct 11, 2020 at 9:12 PM Neal Gompa wrote: > > Hey all, > > I just saw that Linux 5.9 was released, and part of that included > "speakup" (console TTS driver) moving out of staging[1]. Can we make > sure this is enabled when 5.9 lands? > > While I wouldn't presume that it would also be enab

Re: [OS-BUILD PATCHv4 2/4] Update CONFIG_SPEAKUP_SYNTH_DUMMY to remove extra lines.

On Tue, Oct 13, 2020 at 9:36 AM Jiri Benc wrote: > > On Tue, 13 Oct 2020 14:19:35 -, GitLab Bridge on behalf of jmflinuxtx > wrote: > > diff --git a/redhat/configs/common/generic/CONFIG_SPEAKUP_SYNTH_DUMMY > > b/redhat/configs/common/generic/CONFIG_SPEAKUP_SYNTH_DUMMY > > index fc91de6e3981.

Re: ❌ FAIL: Test report for kernel 5.9.0-42.test.fc33 (ark)

On Mon, Oct 19, 2020 at 6:23 AM Veronika Kabatova wrote: > > > > - Original Message - > > From: "Jiri Benc" > > To: "CKI Project" > > Cc: "Don Zickus" , kernel@lists.fedoraproject.org, > > "Veronika Kabatova" > > Sent: Monday, October 19, 2020 11:09:57 AM > > Subject: Re: ❌ FAIL: Test

Re: ❌ FAIL: Test report for kernel 5.9.0-42.test.fc33 (ark)

On Mon, Oct 19, 2020 at 3:12 PM Don Zickus wrote: > > On Mon, Oct 19, 2020 at 11:09:57AM +0200, Jiri Benc wrote: > > On Thu, 15 Oct 2020 12:20:41 +0200, Jiri Benc wrote: > > > On Thu, 15 Oct 2020 09:13:27 -, CKI Project wrote: > > > > Overall result: FAILED (see details below) > > > >

Re: Work-around for gcc compilation bugs?

On Wed, Oct 21, 2020 at 11:27 AM Bastien Nocera wrote: > > Hey, > > I'm trying to build test kernels on my Fedora 33 machine > and ran into: > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1890107 > > Does anyone know a work-around for this? I tried a "dnf downgrade", > to no avail. > Which kernels

Re: Reporting kernel building docs problems?

On Thu, Oct 22, 2020 at 9:59 AM Bastien Nocera wrote: > > Hey, > > A couple of months ago I filed bugs about the kernel-cki build > process and some problems I encountered: > https://gitlab.com/cki-project/kernel-ark/-/issues > > Today, I wanted to build a test kernel for a Fedora user with an > a

Re: Work-around for gcc compilation bugs?

On Thu, Oct 22, 2020 at 4:39 AM Bastien Nocera wrote: > > > > - Original Message - > > On Wed, Oct 21, 2020 at 12:27:20PM -0400, Bastien Nocera wrote: > > > Hey, > > > > > > I'm trying to build test kernels on my Fedora 33 machine > > > and ran into: > > > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_

Re: Work-around for gcc compilation bugs?

On Thu, Oct 22, 2020 at 11:01 AM Jiri Olsa wrote: > > On Thu, Oct 22, 2020 at 10:36:01AM -0500, Justin Forbes wrote: > > On Thu, Oct 22, 2020 at 4:39 AM Bastien Nocera wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > - Original Message - > > > &

Re: kernel 5.9.300 spec file has missing executable gpio-watch in tools file section

On Mon, Oct 26, 2020 at 10:50 AM Brian Masney wrote: > On Sun, Oct 25, 2020 at 02:45:41PM -0700, stan via kernel wrote: > > The src.rpm for kernel 5.9.300 failed to build rpms because gpio-watch > > was not included in the files section of the spec file. Putting it > > there allowed the kernel r

Re: about NVIDIA Driver not yet supported for Linux Kernel 5.9+

On Mon, Oct 26, 2020 at 6:02 AM Sérgio Basto wrote: > > On Mon, 2020-10-26 at 10:30 +, Peter Robinson wrote: > > > First I'd like alert for this issue [1] with kernel 5.9 , and > > > asking if > > > somehow we can delay kernel 5.9 on stable branches ? > > > > You could just exclude the kernel

Re: kernel 5.9.300 spec file has missing executable gpio-watch in tools file section

On Mon, Oct 26, 2020 at 12:40 PM stan via kernel wrote: > > On Mon, 26 Oct 2020 10:54:12 -0500 > Justin Forbes wrote: > > > It shouldn't be a merge request anyway, kernel-5.9.0-300 has > > nothing to do > > with ark. It is based on the F32 spec, with mo

Re: [OS-BUILD PATCH] s390: correct __bootdata / __bootdata_preserved macros

No need to review this. Not sure why it didn't include the subject of the merge request, but 5.10-rc1 does not build on s390 without this patch. I expect it will be picked up upstream soon, just did an MR so it is tagged in release and I don't have to manually apply every day until it is pulled. I

Re: Work-around for gcc compilation bugs?

On Thu, Oct 22, 2020 at 11:54 AM Justin Forbes wrote: > > On Thu, Oct 22, 2020 at 11:01 AM Jiri Olsa wrote: > > > > On Thu, Oct 22, 2020 at 10:36:01AM -0500, Justin Forbes wrote: > > > On Thu, Oct 22, 2020 at 4:39 AM Bastien Nocera wrote: > > > > > &g

Re: Work-around for gcc compilation bugs?

On Fri, Oct 30, 2020 at 3:05 PM Jiri Olsa wrote: > > On Fri, Oct 30, 2020 at 02:57:23PM -0500, Justin Forbes wrote: > > On Thu, Oct 22, 2020 at 11:54 AM Justin Forbes wrote: > > > > > > On Thu, Oct 22, 2020 at 11:01 AM Jiri Olsa wrote: > > > > > &

Re: [OS-BUILD PATCHv3 2/2] Update CONFIG_INET6_ESPINTCP

On Mon, Nov 2, 2020 at 3:04 AM Jiri Benc wrote: > > On Thu, 29 Oct 2020 15:26:53 -, GitLab Bridge on behalf of jmflinuxtx > wrote: > > From: Justin Forbes > > Justin, formatting the commits this way is really making our future > life harder. Could you please: >

Re: heads up regarding some v5.10 changes

On Sat, Oct 31, 2020 at 1:09 PM Peter Robinson wrote: > > FYI: > > -- Forwarded message - > From: Ard Biesheuvel > Date: Sat, Oct 31, 2020 at 10:22 AM > Subject: heads up regarding some v5.10 changes > To: , Arnd Bergmann , > Peter Jones > > > Hello all, > > Just a note to whomev

Re: [OS-BUILD PATCHv3 2/2] Update CONFIG_INET6_ESPINTCP

On Mon, Nov 2, 2020 at 10:46 AM Justin Forbes wrote: > > On Mon, Nov 2, 2020 at 3:04 AM Jiri Benc wrote: > > > > On Thu, 29 Oct 2020 15:26:53 -, GitLab Bridge on behalf of jmflinuxtx > > wrote: > > > From: Justin Forbes > > > > Justin, formatt

Re: Work-around for gcc compilation bugs?

On Fri, Oct 30, 2020 at 5:51 PM Jiri Olsa wrote: > > On Fri, Oct 30, 2020 at 03:25:06PM -0500, Justin Forbes wrote: > > On Fri, Oct 30, 2020 at 3:05 PM Jiri Olsa wrote: > > > > > > On Fri, Oct 30, 2020 at 02:57:23PM -0500, Justin Forbes wrote: > > > &g

Re: Is it acceptable to package non-bootable kernels?

On Thu, Nov 12, 2020 at 2:38 AM Sergio Lopez wrote: > > (This message was originally sent to the Packaging mailing list, where > Jason Tibbitts pointed that this is a restriction requested by the > Kernel team, and it'll be your opinion the one that will prevail here) > > Hi, > > The document "Wha

Re: [OS-BUILD PATCHv2 0/4] Fix bug 1882854

On Thu, Nov 12, 2020 at 6:25 AM GitLab Bridge on behalf of Paulo Edgar Castro wrote: > > From: Paulo Edgar Castro on gitlab.com > https://gitlab.com/cki-project/kernel-ark/-/merge_requests/761#note_446301275 > > > GitLab > > > > CKI Gitlab commented > >

Re: Erase i686 from the kernel package's repository?

On Mon, Nov 16, 2020 at 2:49 PM Paul Bolle wrote: > > Paul Bolle schreef op ma 21-10-2019 om 20:42 [+0200]: > > Justin Forbes schreef op ma 21-10-2019 om 09:02 [-0500]: > > > Because of the way we do rebases, it makes sense to do this when F30 is > > > EOL. &

Re: Erase i686 from the kernel package's repository?

On Mon, Nov 16, 2020 at 4:32 PM Paul Bolle wrote: > > Justin Forbes schreef op ma 16-11-2020 om 16:15 [-0600]: > > It never got high enough on the priority list to remove, we went from > > 3 fedora kernel maintainers to 1 in that 11 months. I probably should > > clean

Re: Enabling CONFIG_ACPI_TABLE_UPGRADE in Fedora kernels

On Wed, Nov 18, 2020 at 3:40 AM Peter Robinson wrote: > > > I believe $subject has been discussed before but I would like to see us > > reconsider this. > > > > I know that the general rule of thumb is that DSDTs should not be overriden > > and instead the kernel should be made to "just work" with

Re: USB-C power patch to cherry-pick

On Thu, Nov 19, 2020 at 4:30 AM Bastien Nocera wrote: > > Hey, > > This now upstreamed patch would be quite useful to have in stable versions > of Fedora, it fixes problems with the AC/battery status not reflecting > reality on some USB-C powered machines: > https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/ke

Re: [OS-BUILD PATCH] [redhat] New configs in drivers/acpi

On Thu, Nov 19, 2020 at 8:00 AM Prarit Bhargava wrote: > > On 11/19/20 7:56 AM, GitLab Bridge on behalf of jeremycline wrote: > > From: Fedora Kernel Team > > > > Hi, > > > > As part of the ongoing rebase effort, the following configuration > > options need to be reviewed. > > > > As a reminder,

  1   2   3   4   5   >