On 05.04.24 05:20, Michael Ellerman wrote:
> "Linux regression tracking (Thorsten Leemhuis)"
> writes:
>> Hi, Thorsten here, the Linux kernel's regression tracker. Top-posting
>> for once, to make this easily accessible to everyone.
>>
>> Was this reg
Hi, Thorsten here, the Linux kernel's regression tracker. Top-posting
for once, to make this easily accessible to everyone.
Was this regression ever resolved? Doesn't look like it, but maybe I
just missed something.
Ciao, Thorsten (wearing his 'the Linux kernel's regression tracker' hat)
--
On 19.11.23 00:45, Timothy Pearson wrote:
> During floating point and vector save to thread data fr0/vs0 are clobbered
> by the FPSCR/VSCR store routine. This leads to userspace register corruption
> and application data corruption / crash under the following rare condition:
> [...]
> Tested-by:
[CCing the regression list, as it should be in the loop for regressions:
https://docs.kernel.org/admin-guide/reporting-regressions.html]
[TLDR: I'm adding this report to the list of tracked Linux kernel
regressions; the text you find below is based on a few templates
paragraphs you might have
On 18.07.23 18:15, Randy Dunlap wrote:
> On 7/18/23 04:48, Michael Ellerman wrote:
>> Bagas Sanjaya writes:
>>> On Thu, Jul 13, 2023 at 09:11:10AM -0700, Randy Dunlap wrote:
on ppc64:
In file included from ../include/linux/device.h:15,
from
On 19.07.23 18:19, Linux regression tracking #adding (Thorsten Leemhuis)
wrote:
> On 17.07.23 16:45, Sachin Sant wrote:
>> Kdump seems to be broken with 6.5 for ppc64le.
>> [...]
>>
>> 6.4 was good. Git bisect points to following patch
>>
>> commit 6
[CCing the regression list, as it should be in the loop for regressions:
https://docs.kernel.org/admin-guide/reporting-regressions.html]
[TLDR: I'm adding this report to the list of tracked Linux kernel
regressions; the text you find below is based on a few templates
paragraphs you might have
On 19.07.23 14:36, Bagas Sanjaya wrote:
> On 7/18/23 17:06, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
>> I'm missing something here:
>>
>> * What makes you think this is caused by bdb616479eff419? I didn't see
>> anything in the thread that claims this, but I might be missing s
Michael, thx for looking into this!
On 18.07.23 13:48, Michael Ellerman wrote:
> Bagas Sanjaya writes:
>> On Thu, Jul 13, 2023 at 09:11:10AM -0700, Randy Dunlap wrote:
>>> on ppc64:
>>>
>>> In file included from ../include/linux/device.h:15,
>>> from
On 18.07.23 05:32, Bagas Sanjaya wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 13, 2023 at 09:11:10AM -0700, Randy Dunlap wrote:
>> On 7/12/23 19:37, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
>>> Changes since 20230712:
>>
>> on ppc64:
>>
>> In file included from ../include/linux/device.h:15,
>> from
ul 2023 10:51:57 +0200 "Linux regression tracking (Thorsten
> Leemhuis)" wrote:
>
>>>>> I'm in wait-a-few-days-mode on this. To see if we have a backportable
>>>>> fix rather than disabling the feature in -stable.
>>
>> Andrew, how long w
On 05.07.23 09:08, Greg KH wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 04, 2023 at 01:22:54PM -0700, Suren Baghdasaryan wrote:
>> On Tue, Jul 4, 2023 at 9:18 AM Andrew Morton
>> wrote:
>>> On Tue, 4 Jul 2023 09:00:19 +0100 Greg KH
>>> wrote:
Thanks! I'll investigate this later today. After discussing with
On 29.06.23 16:40, Jiri Slaby wrote:
> On 27. 02. 23, 18:36, Suren Baghdasaryan wrote:
>> Attempt VMA lock-based page fault handling first, and fall back to the
>> existing mmap_lock-based handling if that fails.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Suren Baghdasaryan
>> ---
>> arch/x86/Kconfig | 1 +
>>
On 02.07.23 14:27, Bagas Sanjaya wrote:
> I notice a regression report on Bugzilla [1]. Quoting from it:
>
>> After upgrading to kernel version 6.4.0 from 6.3.9, I noticed frequent but
>> random crashes in a user space program. After a lot of reduction, I have
>> come up with the following
[CCing the regression list, as it should be in the loop for regressions:
https://docs.kernel.org/admin-guide/reporting-regressions.html]
On 29.06.23 16:40, Jiri Slaby wrote:
>
> On 27. 02. 23, 18:36, Suren Baghdasaryan wrote:
>> Attempt VMA lock-based page fault handling first, and fall back to
Hi, Thorsten here, the Linux kernel's regression tracker. Top-posting
for once, to make this easily accessible to everyone.
As Linus will likely release 6.4 on this or the following Sunday a quick
question: is there any hope this regression might be fixed any time
soon? Doesn't look like it, as
[CCing the regression list, as it should be in the loop for regressions:
https://docs.kernel.org/admin-guide/reporting-regressions.html]
[TLDR: I'm adding this report to the list of tracked Linux kernel
regressions; the text you find below is based on a few templates
paragraphs you might have
/me removes a few people from CC, as this thread already annoyed a few
people
On 11.05.23 10:06, Bagas Sanjaya wrote:
>
> I notice a regression report on bugzilla ([1]). As many developers
> don't keep an eye on it, I decide to forward it by email.
> [...]
> #regzbot introduced: v6.2..v6.3
>
On 08.05.23 14:58, Bagas Sanjaya wrote:
> On Mon, May 08, 2023 at 01:29:22PM +0200, Linux regression tracking #adding
> (Thorsten Leemhuis) wrote:
>> [CCing the regression list, as it should be in the loop for regressions:
>> https://docs.kernel.org/admin-guide/reportin
On 08.05.23 14:49, Michael Ellerman wrote:
> "Linux regression tracking #adding (Thorsten Leemhuis)"
> writes:
>> [CCing the regression list, as it should be in the loop for regressions:
>> https://docs.kernel.org/admin-guide/reporting-regressions.html]
>>
[CCing the regression list, as it should be in the loop for regressions:
https://docs.kernel.org/admin-guide/reporting-regressions.html]
[TLDR: I'm adding this report to the list of tracked Linux kernel
regressions; the text you find below is based on a few templates
paragraphs you might have
[CCing the regression list, as it should be in the loop for regressions:
https://docs.kernel.org/admin-guide/reporting-regressions.html]
On 23.03.23 10:53, Srikar Dronamraju wrote:
>
> I am unable to boot upstream kernels from v5.16 to the latest upstream
> kernel on a maxconfig system. (Machine
the regression tracking bot needs to be told manually
about the fix. See link in footer if these mails annoy you.]
On 16.02.23 11:09, Linux regression tracking (Thorsten Leemhuis) wrote:
>
> On 16.02.23 00:55, Erhard F. wrote:
>> Just noticed a build failure on 6.2-rc7 for my Talos 2 (.con
[TLDR: I'm adding this report to the list of tracked Linux kernel
regressions; the text you find below is based on a few templates
paragraphs you might have encountered already in similar form.
See link in footer if these mails annoy you.]
[CCing the regression list, as it should be in the loop
[Note: this mail contains only information for Linux kernel regression
tracking. Mails like these contain '#forregzbot' in the subject to make
then easy to spot and filter out. The author also tried to remove most
or all individuals from the list of recipients to spare them the hassle.]
On
[Note: this mail is primarily send for documentation purposes and/or for
regzbot, my Linux kernel regression tracking bot. That's why I removed
most or all folks from the list of recipients, but left any that looked
like a mailing lists. These mails usually contain '#forregzbot' in the
subject, to
On 10.03.22 13:22, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
> On 10.03.22 12:22, Christophe Leroy wrote:
>> Le 10/03/2022 à 11:39, Thorsten Leemhuis a écrit :
>>> Hi, this is your Linux kernel regression tracker.
>>>
>>> I noticed a regression report in bugzilla.kernel.org tha
On 10.03.22 12:22, Christophe Leroy wrote:
> Le 10/03/2022 à 11:39, Thorsten Leemhuis a écrit :
>> Hi, this is your Linux kernel regression tracker.
>>
>> I noticed a regression report in bugzilla.kernel.org that afaics nobody
>> acted upon since it was reported abo
Hi, this is your Linux kernel regression tracker.
I noticed a regression report in bugzilla.kernel.org that afaics nobody
acted upon since it was reported about a week ago, that's why I decided
to forward it to the lists and a few relevant people to the CC. To quote
from the ticket:
> 5.16.12
t the case here; if you think it is, don't hesitate to tell me
in a public reply, it's in everyone's interest to set the public record
straight.
#regzbot poke
On 20.01.22 13:54, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
> Hi, this is your Linux kernel regression tracker speaking.
>
> On 04.12.21
Hi, this is your Linux kernel regression tracker speaking.
On 04.12.21 01:40, Leo Li wrote:
>> -Original Message-
>> From: Joakim Tjernlund
>> Sent: Thursday, December 2, 2021 4:45 PM
>> To: regressi...@leemhuis.info; Leo Li ;
>> eugene_bordenkirc...@selinc.com;
vice: S29GL064N (Your regression issue), S29GL256N
> (WZR-HP-G300NH)
> 2. Regression issue: Yes (Your regression issue), No (WZR-HP-G300NH
> as I investigated before)
>
> Regards,
> Ikegami
>
> On 2021/12/14 16:23, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
>> [TLDR: adding this
[TLDR: adding this regression to regzbot; most of this mail is compiled
from a few templates paragraphs some of you might have seen already.]
Hi, this is your Linux kernel regression tracker speaking.
Top-posting for once, to make this easy accessible to everyone.
Thanks for the report.
Adding
Hi, this is your Linux kernel regression tracker speaking.
Top-posting for once, to make this easy to process for everyone:
Li Yang and Felipe Balbi: how to move on with this? It's quite an old
regression, but nevertheless it is one and thus should be fixed. Part of
my position is to make that
Hi, this is your Linux kernel regression tracker speaking.
This looks stalled, as afaics nothing to get this regression fixed
happened since below mail. How can we things rolling again?
Eugene, were you able to look into the patch from Joakim?
Or did I miss anything and some progress to fix
On 26.03.2018 01:37, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> […] Anyway. Go out and test. And let's hope next week is nice and calm and
> I can release the final 4.16 next Sunday without any extra rc's.
>
>Linus
Hi! Find below my seventh regression report for Linux 4.16; it's a "the
final
On 26.03.2018 01:37, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> […] Anyway. Go out and test. And let's hope next week is nice and calm and
> I can release the final 4.16 next Sunday without any extra rc's.
>
>Linus
Hi! Find below my sixth regression report for Linux 4.16. It lists 7
regressions
On 19.03.2018 02:14, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> This has been a nice quiet week, so rc6 is pretty tiny. Everything
> looks like we're on a usual schedule - I'll make an rc7, but hopefully
> that will be it.
Hi! Find below my fifth regression report for Linux 4.16. It lists 7
regressions I'm
On 12.03.2018 01:42, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> This continue to be pretty normal - this rc is slightly larger than
> rc4 was, but that looks like one of the normal fluctuations
Hi! Find below my fourth regression report for Linux 4.16. It lists 9
regressions I'm currently aware of. 1 was fixed
On 05.03.2018 00:15, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> Hmm. A reasonably calm week - the biggest change is to the 'kvm-stat'
> tool, not any actual kernel files.
Hi! Find below my third regression report for Linux 4.16. It lists 7
regressions I'm currently aware of. 3 were fixed since last weeks report.
On 26.02.2018 04:05, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> We're on the normal schedule for 4.16 and everything still looks very regular.
Hi! Find below my second regression report for Linux 4.16. It lists 8
regressions I'm currently aware of.
To anyone reading this: Are you aware of any other regressions
Hi! Find below my first regression report for Linux 4.16. It lists 2
regressions I'm currently aware of.
Are you aware of any other regressions? Then please let me know by mail
(a simple bounce or forward to the email address is enough!).
For details see http://bit.ly/lnxregtrackid And please
Hi! Find below my fourth regression report for Linux 4.14. It lists 6
regressions I'm currently aware of; for most of them fixes are in the
work. 4 regressions got fixed since last weeks report; 1 turned out to
not be a regression.
As always: Are you aware of any other regressions? Then please
Hi! Find below my third regression report for Linux 4.14. It lists 9
regressions I'm currently aware of. Two regressions got fixed since last
weeks report.
As always: Are you aware of any other regressions? Then please let me
know by mail (a simple bounce or forward in my direction is enough!).
Hi! Find below my second regression report for Linux 4.14. It lists 8
regressions I'm currently aware of. One regression was fixed since last
weeks report. One was in there that shouldn't have been there.
As always: Are you aware of any other regressions? Then please let me
know by mail (a simple
Hi! Find below my first regression report for Linux 4.14. It lists 4
regressions I'm currently aware of (two of the reports are my own). I
skimmed LKML, bugzilla.kernel.org, but those were all I found that
looked worthy. And nobody pointed me to any regressions directly. Sigh.
Either we are doing
Hi! Find below my fifth regression report for Linux 4.13. It lists 4
regressions I'm currently aware of. There are no new ones; 2 got fixed
since the last report.
You can also find the report at http://bit.ly/lnxregrep413 where I try
to update it every now and then.
As always: Are you aware of
Hi! Find below my fourth regression report for Linux 4.13. It lists 6
regressions I'm currently aware of. 1 of them is new, 5 got fixed since
the last report (that was two weeks ago; didn't find time for compiling
one last week; sorry). You can also find the report at
http://bit.ly/lnxregrep413
Hi! Find below my third regression report for Linux 4.13. It lists 11
regressions I'm currently aware of (or 10 if you count the two scsi-mq
regressions discussions as one). 4 regressions are new; 3 got fixed
since last weeks report (two others didn't even make it to the report,
as they were
Hi! Find below my second regression report for Linux 4.13. It lists 10
regressions I'm currently aware of (albeit in one case it's not entirely
clear yet if it's a regression in 4.13). One regression got fixed since
last weeks report. You can also find the report at
http://bit.ly/lnxregrep413
Hi! Find below my first regression report for Linux 4.13. It lists 8
regressions I'm currently aware of (a few others I had on my list got
fixed in the past few days). You can also find it at
http://bit.ly/lnxregrep413 where I try to update it every now and then.
As always: Are you aware of any
Hi! Find below my fourth regression report for Linux 4.11. It lists 10
regressions I'm currently aware of. 7 regressions mentioned in last
weeks report got fixed.
As always: Are you aware of any other regressions? Then please let me
know (simply CC regressi...@leemhuis.info). And please tell me
Hi! Find below my third regression report for Linux 4.11. It lists 15
regressions I'm currently aware of. 5 regressions mentioned in last
weeks report got fixed.
As always: Are you aware of any other regressions? Then please let me
know (simply CC regressi...@leemhuis.info). And please tell me if
Hi! Find below my second regression report for Linux 4.11. It lists 13
regressions I'm currently aware of. It lists 6 fixed regressions. Some
of them where in the first report from three weeks ago; a few were
supposed to go into a second report I prepared last week, but wasn't
able to finish :-/
Hi! Find below my first regression report for Linux 4.11. It lists 9
regressions I'm currently aware of.
As always: Are you aware of any other regressions? Then please let me
know (simply CC regressi...@leemhuis.info). And please tell me if there
is anything in the report that shouldn't be there.
Hi! Here is my fifth regression report for Linux 4.9. It lists 11
regressions I'm aware of. 4 of them are new; 6 got fixed since
the last report -- that was two weeks ago, because I yet again
didn't find any spare time to compile a report last Sunday :-/
As always: Are you aware of any other
Hi! Here is my fourth regression report for Linux 4.9. It lists 10
regressions I'm aware of. 6 of them are new; 11 got fixed (wow!)
since the last report -- that was two weeks ago, because I
didn't find any spare time to compile a report last Sunday :-/
As always: Are you aware of any other
Hi! Here is my third regression report for Linux 4.9. It lists 17
regressions I'm aware of. 6 of them are new; 3 got fixed since
last weeks report (a fourth looks fixed as well). The console
problem ("console: don't prefer first registered [...]") got
reported to me multiple times, but the revert
Lo! On 01.11.2016 09:18, Paul Bolle wrote:
> On Sun, 2016-10-30 at 14:20 +0100, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
>> As always: Are you aware of any other regressions? Then please let me
>> know (simply CC regressi...@leemhuis.info).
> Do build regressions count?
That's a good ques
Hi! Here is my second regression report for Linux 4.9. It lists 14
regressions I'm aware of. 4 of them are new; 3 got fixed since last weeks
report.
As always: Are you aware of any other regressions? Then please let me
know (simply CC regressi...@leemhuis.info). And please tell me if there
is
Hi! Here is my first regression report for Linux 4.9. It lists 14
regressions I'm aware of.
As always: Are you aware of any other regressions? Then please let me
know (simply CC regressi...@leemhuis.info). And please tell me if there
is anything in the report that shouldn't be there.
Ciao,
Hi! Here is my fifth regression report for Linux 4.8. It lists 15
regressions I'm aware of. 5 of them are new (for many of those
there are patches available to fix the regression); 3 mentioned
in last weeks report got fixed; 1 is going to be removed.
As always: Are you aware of any other
Hi! Here is my fourth regression report for Linux 4.8. It lists 14
regressions I'm aware of. 5 of them are new; 1 mentioned in last
weeks report got fixed.
As always: Are you aware of any other regressions? Then please let me
know (simply CC regressi...@leemhuis.info). And pls tell me if there
Hi! Here is my third regression report for Linux 4.8. It lists 10
regressions I'm aware of. 6 of them are new; 3 mentioned in the last
report sent two weeks ago got fixed; 3 got removed for other reasons
(see below).
As always: Are you aware of any other regressions? Then please let me
know
Hi! Here is my second regression report for Linux 4.8. It lists 11
regressions. 5 of them are new; 5 mentioned in the last report two
weeks ago got fixed.
FWIW: A small detail: I did not include "Regression - SATA disks behind
USB ones on v4.8-rc1, breaking boot. [Re: Who reordered my disks]"
Hi! Here is my first regression report for Linux 4.8. It lists 11
regressions. I was told or found about 10 more, but it turned out all
of them were fixed already in the past few days. Nice, but this in one
of the reasons why compiling this report took way more hours than the
past few reports
Hi! Here is my eight regression report for Linux 4.7. It lists 13
regressions I'm currently aware of. 6 of them are new; none were fixed.
As usual: Please let me know about any regressions missing on the list
or if it contains something which shouldn't be there. Since the release
of 4.7 there
Hi! Here is my seventh regression report for Linux 4.7. It lists 9
regressions I'm currently aware of. 4 of them are new; 2 are stalled
until the reporter provides more feedback.
The report also mentions 3 regressions that were fixed since the last
report. There is also 1 I plan to remove because
Hi! Here is my sixth regression report for Linux 4.7. It lists 8
regressions I'm currently aware of; 2 of them are new.
The report also mentions 3 regressions that were fixed since the last
report(¹). There were a few ones that were reported to me in the past
week (many thx for that!) and fixed
Hi! Here is my fifth regression report for Linux 4.7. It lists 10
regressions I'm currently aware of; 2 of them are new; 1 of those
seems to be a a side effect of a fix for another regression.
The report also mentions 3 regression that I removed from the list, as
it looks like those issues are
Hi! Here is my fourth regression report for Linux 4.7; a day earlier then usual.
It has 14 entries;
* 2 of them are new
* 9 regressions (not included here) were fixed since the last report(¹)
* 1 made it to the list after last Sunday (thx for telling me about it Kalle!),
but was fixed before
71 matches
Mail list logo
