Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > linux.debian.kernel > #86099 > unrolled thread

Bug#1095764: linux-image-6.1.0-31-amd64: Image 6.1.0-31 does not seem to be build from source 6.1.128-1

Back to article view | Back to linux.debian.kernel

This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.

Contents

  Bug#1095764: linux-image-6.1.0-31-amd64: Image 6.1.0-31 does not seem to be build from source 6.1.128-1 Salvatore Bonaccorso <carnil@debian.org> - 2025-02-23 17:20 +0100
    Processed: Re: Bug#1095764: linux-image-6.1.0-31-amd64: Image  6.1.0-31 does not seem to be build from source 6.1.128-1 "Debian Bug Tracking System" <owner@bugs.debian.org> - 2025-02-23 17:20 +0100
    Bug#1095764: Fwd: Bug#1095764: linux-image-6.1.0-31-amd64: Image 6.1.0-31 does not seem to be build from source 6.1.128-1 Alf Nilsson <alf.nilsson@gmail.com> - 2025-02-24 17:10 +0100
      Bug#1095764: Fwd: Bug#1095764: linux-image-6.1.0-31-amd64: Image 6.1.0-31 does not seem to be build from source 6.1.128-1 Salvatore Bonaccorso <carnil@debian.org> - 2025-02-24 18:00 +0100
        Bug#1095764: Fwd: Bug#1095764: linux-image-6.1.0-31-amd64: Image 6.1.0-31 does not seem to be build from source 6.1.128-1 Salvatore Bonaccorso <carnil@debian.org> - 2025-02-25 07:50 +0100
          Bug#1095764: Fwd: Bug#1095764: linux-image-6.1.0-31-amd64: Image 6.1.0-31 does not seem to be build from source 6.1.128-1 Salvatore Bonaccorso <carnil@debian.org> - 2025-02-25 08:50 +0100
            Processed: Re: Bug#1095764: Fwd: Bug#1095764: linux-image-6.1.0-31-amd64:  Image 6.1.0-31 does not seem to be build from source 6.1.128-1 "Debian Bug Tracking System" <owner@bugs.debian.org> - 2025-02-25 08:50 +0100
          Bug#1095764: Fwd: Bug#1095764: linux-image-6.1.0-31-amd64: Image 6.1.0-31 does not seem to be build from source 6.1.128-1 Alf Nilsson <alf.nilsson@gmail.com> - 2025-02-25 14:10 +0100
            Bug#1095764: Fwd: Bug#1095764: linux-image-6.1.0-31-amd64: Image 6.1.0-31 does not seem to be build from source 6.1.128-1 Alf Nilsson <alf.nilsson@gmail.com> - 2025-02-25 14:20 +0100
              Bug#1095764: Fwd: Bug#1095764: linux-image-6.1.0-31-amd64: Image 6.1.0-31 does not seem to be build from source 6.1.128-1 Salvatore Bonaccorso <carnil@debian.org> - 2025-02-25 14:30 +0100
                Bug#1095764: Fwd: Bug#1095764: linux-image-6.1.0-31-amd64: Image 6.1.0-31 does not seem to be build from source 6.1.128-1 Alf Nilsson <alf.nilsson@gmail.com> - 2025-02-25 14:50 +0100
                  Bug#1095764: Fwd: Bug#1095764: linux-image-6.1.0-31-amd64: Image 6.1.0-31 does not seem to be build from source 6.1.128-1 Alf Nilsson <alf.nilsson@gmail.com> - 2025-02-26 08:40 +0100
      Bug#1095764: Fwd: Bug#1095764: linux-image-6.1.0-31-amd64: Image 6.1.0-31 does not seem to be build from source 6.1.128-1 Salvatore Bonaccorso <carnil@debian.org> - 2025-02-24 18:00 +0100

#86099 — Bug#1095764: linux-image-6.1.0-31-amd64: Image 6.1.0-31 does not seem to be build from source 6.1.128-1

Control: tags -1 + moreinfo
Control: retitle -1 Generalplus Technology Inc. GENERAL WEBCAM does not work / Found multiple Units with ID 5

Hi

On Wed, Feb 12, 2025 at 01:27:46AM +0700, Alf Nilsson wrote:
> Package: src:linux
> Version: 6.1.128-1
> Severity: normal
> 
> Dear Maintainer,
> 
> After following the the driver uvc_driver.c and it's rollback from the linux
> source, I see that the code is updated in the source 6.1.128-1, but when
> booting on the 6.1.0-31 image, my webcam does not work and also gives the
> error message from before the 6.1.128-1 code update.
> 
> "Found multiple Units with ID 5"
> 
> The error message is from code older than 6.1.124-1, so how it can be
> present in the image 6.1.0-31 does not match up.

I'm not really sure what you man with that it's not built from source
and there was a code rollback. Can you be more specific?

I have retitled the bug with my undrestanding that the specific webcam
does not work for your.

Is this a regression? Which is the last 6.1.y kernel which worked?

Can you test recent kernels from unstable (6.12.16-1) or experimental
(6.13.4-1~exp1), does the issue replicate there as well?

Can you attach the USB webcam and then post as well the full kernel
log?

Regards,
Salvatore

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#86100 — Processed: Re: Bug#1095764: linux-image-6.1.0-31-amd64: Image 6.1.0-31 does not seem to be build from source 6.1.128-1

Processing control commands:

> tags -1 + moreinfo
Bug #1095764 [src:linux] linux-image-6.1.0-31-amd64: Image 6.1.0-31 does not seem to be build from source 6.1.128-1
Added tag(s) moreinfo.
> retitle -1 Generalplus Technology Inc. GENERAL WEBCAM does not work / Found multiple Units with ID 5
Bug #1095764 [src:linux] linux-image-6.1.0-31-amd64: Image 6.1.0-31 does not seem to be build from source 6.1.128-1
Changed Bug title to 'Generalplus Technology Inc. GENERAL WEBCAM does not work / Found multiple Units with ID 5' from 'linux-image-6.1.0-31-amd64: Image 6.1.0-31 does not seem to be build from source 6.1.128-1'.

-- 
1095764: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1095764
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact owner@bugs.debian.org with problems

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#86120 — Bug#1095764: Fwd: Bug#1095764: linux-image-6.1.0-31-amd64: Image 6.1.0-31 does not seem to be build from source 6.1.128-1

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

Hello Salvatore,

This is the info about the linux-image-6.1.0-31-and64 package:
Package: linux-image-6.1.0-31-amd64
Version: 6.1.128-1
New: yes
State: installed
Automatically installed: yes
Priority: optional
Section: kernel
Maintainer: Debian Kernel Team <debian-kernel@lists.debian.org>
Architecture: amd64
Uncompressed Size: 409 M
Depends: kmod, linux-base (>= 4.3~), initramfs-tools (>= 0.120+deb8u2) |
linux-initramfs-tool
Recommends: firmware-linux-free, apparmor
Suggests: linux-doc-6.1, debian-kernel-handbook, grub-pc | grub-efi-amd64 |
extlinux
Conflicts: linux-image-6.1.0-31-amd64-unsigned
Breaks: fwupdate (< 12-7), fwupdate:i386 (< 12-7), initramfs-tools (<
0.120+deb8u2), initramfs-tools:i386 (< 0.120+deb8u2), wireless-regdb (<
2019.06.03-1~), wireless-regdb:i386 (< 2019.06.03-1~)
Replaces: linux-image-6.1.0-31-amd64-unsigned
Provides: $kernel (= 6.1.128-1)
Description: Linux 6.1 for 64-bit PCs (signed)
 The Linux kernel 6.1 and modules for use on PCs with AMD64, Intel 64 or
VIA Nano processors.

 The kernel image and modules are signed for use with Secure Boot.
Homepage: https://www.kernel.org/

Notice this:
Version: 6.1.128-1

That makes me assume that if I download the linux-kernel 6.1.128-1 code I
should have the code that this is compiled from.

So I check: linux_source-6.1:
Package: linux-source-6.1
Version: 6.1.128-1
State: installed
Automatically installed: yes
Multi-Arch: foreign
Priority: optional
Section: kernel
Maintainer: Debian Kernel Team <debian-kernel@lists.debian.org>
Architecture: all
Uncompressed Size: 139 M
Depends: binutils, xz-utils
Recommends: build-essential, bc, rsync, kmod, cpio, bison, flex,
libelf-dev, libssl-dev, linux-config-6.1
Suggests: libncurses-dev | ncurses-dev, qtbase5-dev, pkg-config
Provides: linux-source-6.1:i386 (= 6.1.128-1)
Description: Linux kernel source for version 6.1 with Debian patches
 This package provides source code for the Linux kernel version 6.1. This
source closely tracks official Linux kernel releases.  Debian's
modifications to that source consist of security fixes, bug fixes, and
 features that have already been (or are believed to be) accepted by the
upstream maintainers.
Homepage: https://www.kernel.org/

So I go to the file: llinux-source-6.1/drivers/media/usb/uvc/uvc_video.c

And do a grep for : "Found multiple Units"
And no hits, which is correct, the rollback removed the code that added the
"Found multiple Units"

If I go back to a previous version of the kernel code: 6.1.124-1
And do the same grep: "Found multiple Units"
774: dev_err(&dev->udev->dev, "Found multiple Units with ID %u\n", id);

So here we clearly have the code.

So back to my log from journalctl:

Feb 11 23:25:31 lenovo-m83 kernel: Run /init as init process
Feb 11 23:25:31 lenovo-m83 kernel:   with arguments:
Feb 11 23:25:31 lenovo-m83 kernel:     /init
Feb 11 23:25:31 lenovo-m83 kernel:   with environment:
Feb 11 23:25:31 lenovo-m83 kernel:     HOME=/
Feb 11 23:25:31 lenovo-m83 kernel:     TERM=linux
Feb 11 23:25:31 lenovo-m83 kernel:
 BOOT_IMAGE=/boot/vmlinuz-6.1.0-31-amd64
........
Feb 11 23:25:33 lenovo-m83 kernel: usb 2-1: Found multiple Units with ID 5

Kernel 6.1.0-31-amd64.....which should be built from linux-source
6.1.128-1 that does not have that version of the driver, as far as I
understand.

The last kernel that worked good was : 6.1.0-28-amd64.


So am I understanding the version number wrong in the kernel package?

Regards,

Alf Nilsson


On Sun, Feb 23, 2025 at 11:13 PM Salvatore Bonaccorso <carnil@debian.org>
wrote:

> Control: tags -1 + moreinfo
> Control: retitle -1 Generalplus Technology Inc. GENERAL WEBCAM does not
> work / Found multiple Units with ID 5
>
> Hi
>
> On Wed, Feb 12, 2025 at 01:27:46AM +0700, Alf Nilsson wrote:
> > Package: src:linux
> > Version: 6.1.128-1
> > Severity: normal
> >
> > Dear Maintainer,
> >
> > After following the the driver uvc_driver.c and it's rollback from the
> linux
> > source, I see that the code is updated in the source 6.1.128-1, but when
> > booting on the 6.1.0-31 image, my webcam does not work and also gives the
> > error message from before the 6.1.128-1 code update.
> >
> > "Found multiple Units with ID 5"
> >
> > The error message is from code older than 6.1.124-1, so how it can be
> > present in the image 6.1.0-31 does not match up.
>
> I'm not really sure what you man with that it's not built from source
> and there was a code rollback. Can you be more specific?
>
> I have retitled the bug with my undrestanding that the specific webcam
> does not work for your.
>
> Is this a regression? Which is the last 6.1.y kernel which worked?
>
> Can you test recent kernels from unstable (6.12.16-1) or experimental
> (6.13.4-1~exp1), does the issue replicate there as well?
>
> Can you attach the USB webcam and then post as well the full kernel
> log?
>
> Regards,
> Salvatore
>

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#86121 — Bug#1095764: Fwd: Bug#1095764: linux-image-6.1.0-31-amd64: Image 6.1.0-31 does not seem to be build from source 6.1.128-1

Hi Alf,

On Mon, Feb 24, 2025 at 05:52:33PM +0100, Salvatore Bonaccorso wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> On Mon, Feb 24, 2025 at 10:57:39PM +0700, Alf Nilsson wrote:
> > Hello Salvatore,
> > 
> > This is the info about the linux-image-6.1.0-31-and64 package:
> > Package: linux-image-6.1.0-31-amd64
> > Version: 6.1.128-1
> > New: yes
> > State: installed
> > Automatically installed: yes
> > Priority: optional
> > Section: kernel
> > Maintainer: Debian Kernel Team <debian-kernel@lists.debian.org>
> > Architecture: amd64
> > Uncompressed Size: 409 M
> > Depends: kmod, linux-base (>= 4.3~), initramfs-tools (>= 0.120+deb8u2) |
> > linux-initramfs-tool
> > Recommends: firmware-linux-free, apparmor
> > Suggests: linux-doc-6.1, debian-kernel-handbook, grub-pc | grub-efi-amd64 |
> > extlinux
> > Conflicts: linux-image-6.1.0-31-amd64-unsigned
> > Breaks: fwupdate (< 12-7), fwupdate:i386 (< 12-7), initramfs-tools (<
> > 0.120+deb8u2), initramfs-tools:i386 (< 0.120+deb8u2), wireless-regdb (<
> > 2019.06.03-1~), wireless-regdb:i386 (< 2019.06.03-1~)
> > Replaces: linux-image-6.1.0-31-amd64-unsigned
> > Provides: $kernel (= 6.1.128-1)
> > Description: Linux 6.1 for 64-bit PCs (signed)
> >  The Linux kernel 6.1 and modules for use on PCs with AMD64, Intel 64 or
> > VIA Nano processors.
> > 
> >  The kernel image and modules are signed for use with Secure Boot.
> > Homepage: https://www.kernel.org/
> > 
> > Notice this:
> > Version: 6.1.128-1
> > 
> > That makes me assume that if I download the linux-kernel 6.1.128-1 code I
> > should have the code that this is compiled from.
> > 
> > So I check: linux_source-6.1:
> > Package: linux-source-6.1
> > Version: 6.1.128-1
> > State: installed
> > Automatically installed: yes
> > Multi-Arch: foreign
> > Priority: optional
> > Section: kernel
> > Maintainer: Debian Kernel Team <debian-kernel@lists.debian.org>
> > Architecture: all
> > Uncompressed Size: 139 M
> > Depends: binutils, xz-utils
> > Recommends: build-essential, bc, rsync, kmod, cpio, bison, flex,
> > libelf-dev, libssl-dev, linux-config-6.1
> > Suggests: libncurses-dev | ncurses-dev, qtbase5-dev, pkg-config
> > Provides: linux-source-6.1:i386 (= 6.1.128-1)
> > Description: Linux kernel source for version 6.1 with Debian patches
> >  This package provides source code for the Linux kernel version 6.1. This
> > source closely tracks official Linux kernel releases.  Debian's
> > modifications to that source consist of security fixes, bug fixes, and
> >  features that have already been (or are believed to be) accepted by the
> > upstream maintainers.
> > Homepage: https://www.kernel.org/
> > 
> > So I go to the file: llinux-source-6.1/drivers/media/usb/uvc/uvc_video.c
> > 
> > And do a grep for : "Found multiple Units"
> > And no hits, which is correct, the rollback removed the code that added the
> > "Found multiple Units"
> > 
> > If I go back to a previous version of the kernel code: 6.1.124-1
> > And do the same grep: "Found multiple Units"
> > 774: dev_err(&dev->udev->dev, "Found multiple Units with ID %u\n", id);
> > 
> > So here we clearly have the code.
> > 
> > So back to my log from journalctl:
> > 
> > Feb 11 23:25:31 lenovo-m83 kernel: Run /init as init process
> > Feb 11 23:25:31 lenovo-m83 kernel:   with arguments:
> > Feb 11 23:25:31 lenovo-m83 kernel:     /init
> > Feb 11 23:25:31 lenovo-m83 kernel:   with environment:
> > Feb 11 23:25:31 lenovo-m83 kernel:     HOME=/
> > Feb 11 23:25:31 lenovo-m83 kernel:     TERM=linux
> > Feb 11 23:25:31 lenovo-m83 kernel:
> >  BOOT_IMAGE=/boot/vmlinuz-6.1.0-31-amd64
> > ........
> > Feb 11 23:25:33 lenovo-m83 kernel: usb 2-1: Found multiple Units with ID 5
> > 
> > Kernel 6.1.0-31-amd64.....which should be built from linux-source
> > 6.1.128-1 that does not have that version of the driver, as far as I
> > understand.
> > 
> > The last kernel that worked good was : 6.1.0-28-amd64.
> > 
> > 
> > So am I understanding the version number wrong in the kernel package?
> 
> dpkg-query -W -f '${Package}\t${Version}\n' linux-source-6.1
> linux-source-6.1        6.1.128-1
> 
> it is present in the /usr/src/linux-source-6.1.tar.xz:
> 
> grep -R 'Found multiple Units'
> linux-source-6.1/drivers/media/usb/uvc/uvc_driver.c:            dev_err(&dev->udev->dev, "Found multiple Units with ID %u\n", id);

If we want to tackle the webcam issue:

> Is this a regression? Which is the last 6.1.y kernel which worked?
>
> Can you test recent kernels from unstable (6.12.16-1) or experimental
> (6.13.4-1~exp1), does the issue replicate there as well?
>
> Can you attach the USB webcam and then post as well the full kernel
> log?

Regards,
Salvatore

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#86128 — Bug#1095764: Fwd: Bug#1095764: linux-image-6.1.0-31-amd64: Image 6.1.0-31 does not seem to be build from source 6.1.128-1

Control: tags -1 + moreinfo
Control: found -1 6.1.123-1

HI Alf,

On Tue, Feb 25, 2025 at 02:53:10AM +0700, Alf Nilsson wrote:
> Hello Salvatore,
> 
> Strange about the 6.1 source.
> 
> root@lenovo-m83:~# aptitude search linux-source-6.1 -vv
> i A linux-source-6.1
>                             - Linux kernel source for version 6.1 with
> Debian patches
> v   linux-source-6.1:i386
>                            -
> 
> 
> root@lenovo-m83:~# aptitude show linux-source-6.1
> Package: linux-source-6.1
> Version: 6.1.128-1
> State: installed
> Automatically installed: yes
> Multi-Arch: foreign
> Priority: optional
> Section: kernel
> Maintainer: Debian Kernel Team <debian-kernel@lists.debian.org>
> Architecture: all
> Uncompressed Size: 139 M
> Depends: binutils, xz-utils
> Recommends: build-essential, bc, rsync, kmod, cpio, bison, flex,
> libelf-dev, libssl-dev, linux-config-6.1
> Suggests: libncurses-dev | ncurses-dev, qtbase5-dev, pkg-config
> Provides: linux-source-6.1:i386 (= 6.1.128-1)
> Description: Linux kernel source for version 6.1 with Debian patches
>  This package provides source code for the Linux kernel version 6.1. This
> source closely tracks official Linux kernel releases.  Debian's
> modifications to that source consist of security fixes, bug fixes, and
>  features that have already been (or are believed to be) accepted by the
> upstream maintainers.
> Homepage: https://www.kernel.org/
> 
> root@lenovo-m83:/# grep -R 'Found multiple Units' /usr/src/linux-source-6.1
> root@lenovo-m83:/#
> 
> So not found in my source code on a Debian 12 system.

Ah, this is because you have not uncompressend the provided source.
linux-source-6.1 contains /usr/src/linux-source-6.1.tar.xz

> > Is this a regression? Which is the last 6.1.y kernel which worked?
> >
> root@lenovo-m83:/var/run# uname -vr
> 6.1.0-28-amd64 #1 SMP PREEMPT_DYNAMIC Debian 6.1.119-1 (2024-11-22)

So this is good to know, so it regressed between 6.1.119 and 6.1.123.

> > Can you test recent kernels from unstable (6.12.16-1) or experimental
> > (6.13.4-1~exp1), does the issue replicate there as well?
> root@debian-unstable:~# uname -vr
> 6.12.16-amd64 #1 SMP PREEMPT_DYNAMIC Debian 6.12.16-1 (2025-02-22)
> 
> Works fine in unstable.
> 
> Reboot now to 3.1.0-31-amd.
> 
> root@lenovo-m83:~# uname -vr
> 6.1.0-31-amd64 #1 SMP PREEMPT_DYNAMIC Debian 6.1.128-1 (2025-02-07)
> 
> Attaching a boot kernel log with the camera attached.
> (See kernel.log)

Thanks. 

Would you be able to bisect the changes upstream between 6.1.119 and
6.1.123?

https://wiki.debian.org/DebianKernel/GitBisect

contains instructions on how to do so. Our goal would be to identify
which commit between 6.1.119 and 6.1.123 upstream does regress the
functionality so it can either double-checked against upper stable
series and/or report upstream for the 6.1.y branch.

So we need your help here in debugging as you have the HW. Is the
above helping you on how to proceed?

Regards,
Salvatore

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#86129 — Bug#1095764: Fwd: Bug#1095764: linux-image-6.1.0-31-amd64: Image 6.1.0-31 does not seem to be build from source 6.1.128-1

Control: found -1 6.12.5-1
Control: found -1 6.13~rc6-1~exp1
Control: tags -1 + upstream
Control: tags -1 - moreinfo
Control: close -1 6.13.3-1~exp1
Control: close -1 6.12.15-1

On Tue, Feb 25, 2025 at 07:43:06AM +0100, Salvatore Bonaccorso wrote:
> Control: tags -1 + moreinfo
> Control: found -1 6.1.123-1
> 
> HI Alf,
> 
> On Tue, Feb 25, 2025 at 02:53:10AM +0700, Alf Nilsson wrote:
> > Hello Salvatore,
> > 
> > Strange about the 6.1 source.
> > 
> > root@lenovo-m83:~# aptitude search linux-source-6.1 -vv
> > i A linux-source-6.1
> >                             - Linux kernel source for version 6.1 with
> > Debian patches
> > v   linux-source-6.1:i386
> >                            -
> > 
> > 
> > root@lenovo-m83:~# aptitude show linux-source-6.1
> > Package: linux-source-6.1
> > Version: 6.1.128-1
> > State: installed
> > Automatically installed: yes
> > Multi-Arch: foreign
> > Priority: optional
> > Section: kernel
> > Maintainer: Debian Kernel Team <debian-kernel@lists.debian.org>
> > Architecture: all
> > Uncompressed Size: 139 M
> > Depends: binutils, xz-utils
> > Recommends: build-essential, bc, rsync, kmod, cpio, bison, flex,
> > libelf-dev, libssl-dev, linux-config-6.1
> > Suggests: libncurses-dev | ncurses-dev, qtbase5-dev, pkg-config
> > Provides: linux-source-6.1:i386 (= 6.1.128-1)
> > Description: Linux kernel source for version 6.1 with Debian patches
> >  This package provides source code for the Linux kernel version 6.1. This
> > source closely tracks official Linux kernel releases.  Debian's
> > modifications to that source consist of security fixes, bug fixes, and
> >  features that have already been (or are believed to be) accepted by the
> > upstream maintainers.
> > Homepage: https://www.kernel.org/
> > 
> > root@lenovo-m83:/# grep -R 'Found multiple Units' /usr/src/linux-source-6.1
> > root@lenovo-m83:/#
> > 
> > So not found in my source code on a Debian 12 system.
> 
> Ah, this is because you have not uncompressend the provided source.
> linux-source-6.1 contains /usr/src/linux-source-6.1.tar.xz
> 
> > > Is this a regression? Which is the last 6.1.y kernel which worked?
> > >
> > root@lenovo-m83:/var/run# uname -vr
> > 6.1.0-28-amd64 #1 SMP PREEMPT_DYNAMIC Debian 6.1.119-1 (2024-11-22)
> 
> So this is good to know, so it regressed between 6.1.119 and 6.1.123.
> 
> > > Can you test recent kernels from unstable (6.12.16-1) or experimental
> > > (6.13.4-1~exp1), does the issue replicate there as well?
> > root@debian-unstable:~# uname -vr
> > 6.12.16-amd64 #1 SMP PREEMPT_DYNAMIC Debian 6.12.16-1 (2025-02-22)
> > 
> > Works fine in unstable.
> > 
> > Reboot now to 3.1.0-31-amd.
> > 
> > root@lenovo-m83:~# uname -vr
> > 6.1.0-31-amd64 #1 SMP PREEMPT_DYNAMIC Debian 6.1.128-1 (2025-02-07)
> > 
> > Attaching a boot kernel log with the camera attached.
> > (See kernel.log)
> 
> Thanks. 
> 
> Would you be able to bisect the changes upstream between 6.1.119 and
> 6.1.123?
> 
> https://wiki.debian.org/DebianKernel/GitBisect
> 
> contains instructions on how to do so. Our goal would be to identify
> which commit between 6.1.119 and 6.1.123 upstream does regress the
> functionality so it can either double-checked against upper stable
> series and/or report upstream for the 6.1.y branch.
> 
> So we need your help here in debugging as you have the HW. Is the
> above helping you on how to proceed?

The behaviour-change you are facing is defintively introdoced here:
Fixes: 3dd075fe8ebb ("media: uvcvideo: Require entities to have a
non-zero unique ID") in 6.13-rc1.
This one was backported to various stable series: 5.10.231, 5.15.174,
6.1.120, 6.6.64, 6.12.4.

It looks that this caused several regressions, in fact it got reverted
upstream in 8004d635f27b ("Revert "media: uvcvideo: Require entities
to have a non-zero unique ID"") in 6.14-rc1 and then backproted to
6.13.3, 6.12.14, 6.6.78 *and* 6.1.129.

Thus I believe your issue will be fixed in the next upload based on at
least 6.1.129.

Regards,
Salvatore

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#86130 — Processed: Re: Bug#1095764: Fwd: Bug#1095764: linux-image-6.1.0-31-amd64: Image 6.1.0-31 does not seem to be build from source 6.1.128-1

Processing control commands:

> found -1 6.12.5-1
Bug #1095764 [src:linux] Generalplus Technology Inc. GENERAL WEBCAM does not work / Found multiple Units with ID 5
Marked as found in versions linux/6.12.5-1.
> found -1 6.13~rc6-1~exp1
Bug #1095764 [src:linux] Generalplus Technology Inc. GENERAL WEBCAM does not work / Found multiple Units with ID 5
Marked as found in versions linux/6.13~rc6-1~exp1.
> tags -1 + upstream
Bug #1095764 [src:linux] Generalplus Technology Inc. GENERAL WEBCAM does not work / Found multiple Units with ID 5
Added tag(s) upstream.
> tags -1 - moreinfo
Bug #1095764 [src:linux] Generalplus Technology Inc. GENERAL WEBCAM does not work / Found multiple Units with ID 5
Removed tag(s) moreinfo.
> close -1 6.13.3-1~exp1
Bug #1095764 [src:linux] Generalplus Technology Inc. GENERAL WEBCAM does not work / Found multiple Units with ID 5
Marked as fixed in versions linux/6.13.3-1~exp1.
Bug #1095764 [src:linux] Generalplus Technology Inc. GENERAL WEBCAM does not work / Found multiple Units with ID 5
Marked Bug as done
> close -1 6.12.15-1
Bug #1095764 {Done: Salvatore Bonaccorso <carnil@debian.org>} [src:linux] Generalplus Technology Inc. GENERAL WEBCAM does not work / Found multiple Units with ID 5
Marked as fixed in versions linux/6.12.15-1.
Bug #1095764 {Done: Salvatore Bonaccorso <carnil@debian.org>} [src:linux] Generalplus Technology Inc. GENERAL WEBCAM does not work / Found multiple Units with ID 5
Bug 1095764 is already marked as done; not doing anything.

-- 
1095764: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1095764
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact owner@bugs.debian.org with problems

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#86133 — Bug#1095764: Fwd: Bug#1095764: linux-image-6.1.0-31-amd64: Image 6.1.0-31 does not seem to be build from source 6.1.128-1

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

Hello Salvatore,

I do have it uncompressed:
affetwoday@lenovo-m83:/usr/src/linux-source-6.1$ ls -l
total 968
drwxr-xr-x  24 root root   4096 Aug  8  2023 arch
drwxr-xr-x   3 root root   4096 Jul  6  2023 block
drwxr-xr-x   2 root root   4096 Jul  6  2023 certs
-rw-r--r--   1 root root    496 Jul  6  2023 COPYING
-rw-r--r--   1 root root 101639 Jul  6  2023 CREDITS
drwxr-xr-x   4 root root   4096 Jul  6  2023 crypto
drwxr-xr-x  86 root root   4096 Aug  8  2023 Documentation
drwxr-xr-x 139 root root   4096 Jul  6  2023 drivers
drwxr-xr-x  81 root root   4096 Aug  8  2023 fs
drwxr-xr-x  33 root root   4096 Aug 11  2023 include
drwxr-xr-x   2 root root   4096 Aug  8  2023 init
drwxr-xr-x   2 root root   4096 Jul  6  2023 io_uring
drwxr-xr-x   2 root root   4096 Jul  6  2023 ipc
-rw-r--r--   1 root root   2573 Jul  6  2023 Kbuild
-rw-r--r--   1 root root    555 Jul  6  2023 Kconfig
drwxr-xr-x  22 root root   4096 Aug  8  2023 kernel
drwxr-xr-x  22 root root  12288 Aug  8  2023 lib
drwxr-xr-x   6 root root   4096 Jul  6  2023 LICENSES
-rw-r--r--   1 root root 688533 Jul  6  2023 MAINTAINERS
-rw-r--r--   1 root root  72209 Aug  8  2023 Makefile
drwxr-xr-x   6 root root   4096 Aug  8  2023 mm
drwxr-xr-x  71 root root   4096 Jul  6  2023 net
-rw-r--r--   1 root root    727 Jul  6  2023 README
drwxr-xr-x   6 root root   4096 Jul  6  2023 rust
drwxr-xr-x  39 root root   4096 Jul  6  2023 samples
drwxr-xr-x  17 root root   4096 Aug  8  2023 scripts
drwxr-xr-x  14 root root   4096 Aug  8  2023 security
drwxr-xr-x  27 root root   4096 Jul  6  2023 sound
drwxr-xr-x  41 root root   4096 Jul  6  2023 tools
drwxr-xr-x   4 root root   4096 Jul  6  2023 usr
drwxr-xr-x   4 root root   4096 Jul  6  2023 virt

And I only installed the source package using apt. So really strange that
my 6.1.128-1 does not have the breaking change, but the one you are looking
at has it.

I will download the deb package again and recheck it.
And....I re-downloaded 6.1.128-1....and now it has the code that breaks the
uvc_driver.c

So that means that : The kernel build is then correct as the 128-1 code
still has the broken driver.
(But my locally installed apt source, for some reason does not have it)

And about debugging, I don't really feel the need due to that I have been
following the upstream development of the uvcvideo driver.

Upstream commit that broke it:
https://github.com/torvalds/linux/commit/3dd075fe8ebbc6fcbf998f81a75b8c4b159a6195
First RC with broken code: Linux 6.12-rc3

Upstream commit that un-broke it:
https://github.com/torvalds/linux/commit/8004d635f27bbccaa5c083c50d4d5302a6ffa00e
First RC with un-broken code: Linux 6.14-rc1

Do you need the same info from the stable branch?

Regards,
Alf Nilsson


On Tue, Feb 25, 2025 at 1:43 PM Salvatore Bonaccorso <carnil@debian.org>
wrote:

> Control: tags -1 + moreinfo
> Control: found -1 6.1.123-1
>
> HI Alf,
>
> On Tue, Feb 25, 2025 at 02:53:10AM +0700, Alf Nilsson wrote:
> > Hello Salvatore,
> >
> > Strange about the 6.1 source.
> >
> > root@lenovo-m83:~# aptitude search linux-source-6.1 -vv
> > i A linux-source-6.1
> >                             - Linux kernel source for version 6.1 with
> > Debian patches
> > v   linux-source-6.1:i386
> >                            -
> >
> >
> > root@lenovo-m83:~# aptitude show linux-source-6.1
> > Package: linux-source-6.1
> > Version: 6.1.128-1
> > State: installed
> > Automatically installed: yes
> > Multi-Arch: foreign
> > Priority: optional
> > Section: kernel
> > Maintainer: Debian Kernel Team <debian-kernel@lists.debian.org>
> > Architecture: all
> > Uncompressed Size: 139 M
> > Depends: binutils, xz-utils
> > Recommends: build-essential, bc, rsync, kmod, cpio, bison, flex,
> > libelf-dev, libssl-dev, linux-config-6.1
> > Suggests: libncurses-dev | ncurses-dev, qtbase5-dev, pkg-config
> > Provides: linux-source-6.1:i386 (= 6.1.128-1)
> > Description: Linux kernel source for version 6.1 with Debian patches
> >  This package provides source code for the Linux kernel version 6.1. This
> > source closely tracks official Linux kernel releases.  Debian's
> > modifications to that source consist of security fixes, bug fixes, and
> >  features that have already been (or are believed to be) accepted by the
> > upstream maintainers.
> > Homepage: https://www.kernel.org/
> >
> > root@lenovo-m83:/# grep -R 'Found multiple Units'
> /usr/src/linux-source-6.1
> > root@lenovo-m83:/#
> >
> > So not found in my source code on a Debian 12 system.
>
> Ah, this is because you have not uncompressend the provided source.
> linux-source-6.1 contains /usr/src/linux-source-6.1.tar.xz
>
> > > Is this a regression? Which is the last 6.1.y kernel which worked?
> > >
> > root@lenovo-m83:/var/run# uname -vr
> > 6.1.0-28-amd64 #1 SMP PREEMPT_DYNAMIC Debian 6.1.119-1 (2024-11-22)
>
> So this is good to know, so it regressed between 6.1.119 and 6.1.123.
>
> > > Can you test recent kernels from unstable (6.12.16-1) or experimental
> > > (6.13.4-1~exp1), does the issue replicate there as well?
> > root@debian-unstable:~# uname -vr
> > 6.12.16-amd64 #1 SMP PREEMPT_DYNAMIC Debian 6.12.16-1 (2025-02-22)
> >
> > Works fine in unstable.
> >
> > Reboot now to 3.1.0-31-amd.
> >
> > root@lenovo-m83:~# uname -vr
> > 6.1.0-31-amd64 #1 SMP PREEMPT_DYNAMIC Debian 6.1.128-1 (2025-02-07)
> >
> > Attaching a boot kernel log with the camera attached.
> > (See kernel.log)
>
> Thanks.
>
> Would you be able to bisect the changes upstream between 6.1.119 and
> 6.1.123?
>
> https://wiki.debian.org/DebianKernel/GitBisect
>
> contains instructions on how to do so. Our goal would be to identify
> which commit between 6.1.119 and 6.1.123 upstream does regress the
> functionality so it can either double-checked against upper stable
> series and/or report upstream for the 6.1.y branch.
>
> So we need your help here in debugging as you have the HW. Is the
> above helping you on how to proceed?
>
> Regards,
> Salvatore
>

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#86134 — Bug#1095764: Fwd: Bug#1095764: linux-image-6.1.0-31-amd64: Image 6.1.0-31 does not seem to be build from source 6.1.128-1

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

Hello Salvatore,

Thank you for the information, that is exactly in line with what I was
typing in my previous message that just took so long to write.

Then I eagerly await 6.1.129. :)

Regards,
Alf Nilsson

On Tue, Feb 25, 2025 at 8:06 PM Alf Nilsson <alf.nilsson@gmail.com> wrote:

> Hello Salvatore,
>
> I do have it uncompressed:
> affetwoday@lenovo-m83:/usr/src/linux-source-6.1$ ls -l
> total 968
> drwxr-xr-x  24 root root   4096 Aug  8  2023 arch
> drwxr-xr-x   3 root root   4096 Jul  6  2023 block
> drwxr-xr-x   2 root root   4096 Jul  6  2023 certs
> -rw-r--r--   1 root root    496 Jul  6  2023 COPYING
> -rw-r--r--   1 root root 101639 Jul  6  2023 CREDITS
> drwxr-xr-x   4 root root   4096 Jul  6  2023 crypto
> drwxr-xr-x  86 root root   4096 Aug  8  2023 Documentation
> drwxr-xr-x 139 root root   4096 Jul  6  2023 drivers
> drwxr-xr-x  81 root root   4096 Aug  8  2023 fs
> drwxr-xr-x  33 root root   4096 Aug 11  2023 include
> drwxr-xr-x   2 root root   4096 Aug  8  2023 init
> drwxr-xr-x   2 root root   4096 Jul  6  2023 io_uring
> drwxr-xr-x   2 root root   4096 Jul  6  2023 ipc
> -rw-r--r--   1 root root   2573 Jul  6  2023 Kbuild
> -rw-r--r--   1 root root    555 Jul  6  2023 Kconfig
> drwxr-xr-x  22 root root   4096 Aug  8  2023 kernel
> drwxr-xr-x  22 root root  12288 Aug  8  2023 lib
> drwxr-xr-x   6 root root   4096 Jul  6  2023 LICENSES
> -rw-r--r--   1 root root 688533 Jul  6  2023 MAINTAINERS
> -rw-r--r--   1 root root  72209 Aug  8  2023 Makefile
> drwxr-xr-x   6 root root   4096 Aug  8  2023 mm
> drwxr-xr-x  71 root root   4096 Jul  6  2023 net
> -rw-r--r--   1 root root    727 Jul  6  2023 README
> drwxr-xr-x   6 root root   4096 Jul  6  2023 rust
> drwxr-xr-x  39 root root   4096 Jul  6  2023 samples
> drwxr-xr-x  17 root root   4096 Aug  8  2023 scripts
> drwxr-xr-x  14 root root   4096 Aug  8  2023 security
> drwxr-xr-x  27 root root   4096 Jul  6  2023 sound
> drwxr-xr-x  41 root root   4096 Jul  6  2023 tools
> drwxr-xr-x   4 root root   4096 Jul  6  2023 usr
> drwxr-xr-x   4 root root   4096 Jul  6  2023 virt
>
> And I only installed the source package using apt. So really strange that
> my 6.1.128-1 does not have the breaking change, but the one you are looking
> at has it.
>
> I will download the deb package again and recheck it.
> And....I re-downloaded 6.1.128-1....and now it has the code that breaks
> the uvc_driver.c
>
> So that means that : The kernel build is then correct as the 128-1 code
> still has the broken driver.
> (But my locally installed apt source, for some reason does not have it)
>
> And about debugging, I don't really feel the need due to that I have been
> following the upstream development of the uvcvideo driver.
>
> Upstream commit that broke it:
>
> https://github.com/torvalds/linux/commit/3dd075fe8ebbc6fcbf998f81a75b8c4b159a6195
> First RC with broken code: Linux 6.12-rc3
>
> Upstream commit that un-broke it:
>
> https://github.com/torvalds/linux/commit/8004d635f27bbccaa5c083c50d4d5302a6ffa00e
> First RC with un-broken code: Linux 6.14-rc1
>
> Do you need the same info from the stable branch?
>
> Regards,
> Alf Nilsson
>
>
> On Tue, Feb 25, 2025 at 1:43 PM Salvatore Bonaccorso <carnil@debian.org>
> wrote:
>
>> Control: tags -1 + moreinfo
>> Control: found -1 6.1.123-1
>>
>> HI Alf,
>>
>> On Tue, Feb 25, 2025 at 02:53:10AM +0700, Alf Nilsson wrote:
>> > Hello Salvatore,
>> >
>> > Strange about the 6.1 source.
>> >
>> > root@lenovo-m83:~# aptitude search linux-source-6.1 -vv
>> > i A linux-source-6.1
>> >                             - Linux kernel source for version 6.1 with
>> > Debian patches
>> > v   linux-source-6.1:i386
>> >                            -
>> >
>> >
>> > root@lenovo-m83:~# aptitude show linux-source-6.1
>> > Package: linux-source-6.1
>> > Version: 6.1.128-1
>> > State: installed
>> > Automatically installed: yes
>> > Multi-Arch: foreign
>> > Priority: optional
>> > Section: kernel
>> > Maintainer: Debian Kernel Team <debian-kernel@lists.debian.org>
>> > Architecture: all
>> > Uncompressed Size: 139 M
>> > Depends: binutils, xz-utils
>> > Recommends: build-essential, bc, rsync, kmod, cpio, bison, flex,
>> > libelf-dev, libssl-dev, linux-config-6.1
>> > Suggests: libncurses-dev | ncurses-dev, qtbase5-dev, pkg-config
>> > Provides: linux-source-6.1:i386 (= 6.1.128-1)
>> > Description: Linux kernel source for version 6.1 with Debian patches
>> >  This package provides source code for the Linux kernel version 6.1.
>> This
>> > source closely tracks official Linux kernel releases.  Debian's
>> > modifications to that source consist of security fixes, bug fixes, and
>> >  features that have already been (or are believed to be) accepted by the
>> > upstream maintainers.
>> > Homepage: https://www.kernel.org/
>> >
>> > root@lenovo-m83:/# grep -R 'Found multiple Units'
>> /usr/src/linux-source-6.1
>> > root@lenovo-m83:/#
>> >
>> > So not found in my source code on a Debian 12 system.
>>
>> Ah, this is because you have not uncompressend the provided source.
>> linux-source-6.1 contains /usr/src/linux-source-6.1.tar.xz
>>
>> > > Is this a regression? Which is the last 6.1.y kernel which worked?
>> > >
>> > root@lenovo-m83:/var/run# uname -vr
>> > 6.1.0-28-amd64 #1 SMP PREEMPT_DYNAMIC Debian 6.1.119-1 (2024-11-22)
>>
>> So this is good to know, so it regressed between 6.1.119 and 6.1.123.
>>
>> > > Can you test recent kernels from unstable (6.12.16-1) or experimental
>> > > (6.13.4-1~exp1), does the issue replicate there as well?
>> > root@debian-unstable:~# uname -vr
>> > 6.12.16-amd64 #1 SMP PREEMPT_DYNAMIC Debian 6.12.16-1 (2025-02-22)
>> >
>> > Works fine in unstable.
>> >
>> > Reboot now to 3.1.0-31-amd.
>> >
>> > root@lenovo-m83:~# uname -vr
>> > 6.1.0-31-amd64 #1 SMP PREEMPT_DYNAMIC Debian 6.1.128-1 (2025-02-07)
>> >
>> > Attaching a boot kernel log with the camera attached.
>> > (See kernel.log)
>>
>> Thanks.
>>
>> Would you be able to bisect the changes upstream between 6.1.119 and
>> 6.1.123?
>>
>> https://wiki.debian.org/DebianKernel/GitBisect
>>
>> contains instructions on how to do so. Our goal would be to identify
>> which commit between 6.1.119 and 6.1.123 upstream does regress the
>> functionality so it can either double-checked against upper stable
>> series and/or report upstream for the 6.1.y branch.
>>
>> So we need your help here in debugging as you have the HW. Is the
>> above helping you on how to proceed?
>>
>> Regards,
>> Salvatore
>>
>

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#86135 — Bug#1095764: Fwd: Bug#1095764: linux-image-6.1.0-31-amd64: Image 6.1.0-31 does not seem to be build from source 6.1.128-1

Hi,

On Tue, Feb 25, 2025 at 08:09:50PM +0700, Alf Nilsson wrote:
> Hello Salvatore,
> 
> Thank you for the information, that is exactly in line with what I was
> typing in my previous message that just took so long to write.
> 
> Then I eagerly await 6.1.129. :)

Good we are on the same page :)

Btw if you want to test the changes in 6.1.129-1 with *unofficial*(!)
and unsigned packages, I have built earlier 6.1.129-1 for testing and
is in

https://people.debian.org/~carnil/tmp/linux/6.1.129-1/

To have some verification I have uploades a sha256sum file for those
files and signed it with a detached sginature with my key which you
find in the Debian keyring.

Regards,
Salvatore

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#86136 — Bug#1095764: Fwd: Bug#1095764: linux-image-6.1.0-31-amd64: Image 6.1.0-31 does not seem to be build from source 6.1.128-1

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

Hello Salvatore,

I'll fire up my test harddrive after work and give it a shot. :)

Regards,
Alf Nilsson

On Tue, Feb 25, 2025 at 8:21 PM Salvatore Bonaccorso <carnil@debian.org>
wrote:

> Hi,
>
> On Tue, Feb 25, 2025 at 08:09:50PM +0700, Alf Nilsson wrote:
> > Hello Salvatore,
> >
> > Thank you for the information, that is exactly in line with what I was
> > typing in my previous message that just took so long to write.
> >
> > Then I eagerly await 6.1.129. :)
>
> Good we are on the same page :)
>
> Btw if you want to test the changes in 6.1.129-1 with *unofficial*(!)
> and unsigned packages, I have built earlier 6.1.129-1 for testing and
> is in
>
> https://people.debian.org/~carnil/tmp/linux/6.1.129-1/
>
> To have some verification I have uploades a sha256sum file for those
> files and signed it with a detached sginature with my key which you
> find in the Debian keyring.
>
> Regards,
> Salvatore
>

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#86149 — Bug#1095764: Fwd: Bug#1095764: linux-image-6.1.0-31-amd64: Image 6.1.0-31 does not seem to be build from source 6.1.128-1

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

Hello Salvatore,

I've tested the linux-image-6.1.0-32 and the webcam works fine, but note,
that is the ONLY thing i tested. :)

Regards,
Alf Nilsson

On Tue, Feb 25, 2025 at 8:44 PM Alf Nilsson <alf.nilsson@gmail.com> wrote:

> Hello Salvatore,
>
> I'll fire up my test harddrive after work and give it a shot. :)
>
> Regards,
> Alf Nilsson
>
> On Tue, Feb 25, 2025 at 8:21 PM Salvatore Bonaccorso <carnil@debian.org>
> wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> On Tue, Feb 25, 2025 at 08:09:50PM +0700, Alf Nilsson wrote:
>> > Hello Salvatore,
>> >
>> > Thank you for the information, that is exactly in line with what I was
>> > typing in my previous message that just took so long to write.
>> >
>> > Then I eagerly await 6.1.129. :)
>>
>> Good we are on the same page :)
>>
>> Btw if you want to test the changes in 6.1.129-1 with *unofficial*(!)
>> and unsigned packages, I have built earlier 6.1.129-1 for testing and
>> is in
>>
>> https://people.debian.org/~carnil/tmp/linux/6.1.129-1/
>>
>> To have some verification I have uploades a sha256sum file for those
>> files and signed it with a detached sginature with my key which you
>> find in the Debian keyring.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Salvatore
>>
>

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#86122 — Bug#1095764: Fwd: Bug#1095764: linux-image-6.1.0-31-amd64: Image 6.1.0-31 does not seem to be build from source 6.1.128-1

Hi,

On Mon, Feb 24, 2025 at 10:57:39PM +0700, Alf Nilsson wrote:
> Hello Salvatore,
> 
> This is the info about the linux-image-6.1.0-31-and64 package:
> Package: linux-image-6.1.0-31-amd64
> Version: 6.1.128-1
> New: yes
> State: installed
> Automatically installed: yes
> Priority: optional
> Section: kernel
> Maintainer: Debian Kernel Team <debian-kernel@lists.debian.org>
> Architecture: amd64
> Uncompressed Size: 409 M
> Depends: kmod, linux-base (>= 4.3~), initramfs-tools (>= 0.120+deb8u2) |
> linux-initramfs-tool
> Recommends: firmware-linux-free, apparmor
> Suggests: linux-doc-6.1, debian-kernel-handbook, grub-pc | grub-efi-amd64 |
> extlinux
> Conflicts: linux-image-6.1.0-31-amd64-unsigned
> Breaks: fwupdate (< 12-7), fwupdate:i386 (< 12-7), initramfs-tools (<
> 0.120+deb8u2), initramfs-tools:i386 (< 0.120+deb8u2), wireless-regdb (<
> 2019.06.03-1~), wireless-regdb:i386 (< 2019.06.03-1~)
> Replaces: linux-image-6.1.0-31-amd64-unsigned
> Provides: $kernel (= 6.1.128-1)
> Description: Linux 6.1 for 64-bit PCs (signed)
>  The Linux kernel 6.1 and modules for use on PCs with AMD64, Intel 64 or
> VIA Nano processors.
> 
>  The kernel image and modules are signed for use with Secure Boot.
> Homepage: https://www.kernel.org/
> 
> Notice this:
> Version: 6.1.128-1
> 
> That makes me assume that if I download the linux-kernel 6.1.128-1 code I
> should have the code that this is compiled from.
> 
> So I check: linux_source-6.1:
> Package: linux-source-6.1
> Version: 6.1.128-1
> State: installed
> Automatically installed: yes
> Multi-Arch: foreign
> Priority: optional
> Section: kernel
> Maintainer: Debian Kernel Team <debian-kernel@lists.debian.org>
> Architecture: all
> Uncompressed Size: 139 M
> Depends: binutils, xz-utils
> Recommends: build-essential, bc, rsync, kmod, cpio, bison, flex,
> libelf-dev, libssl-dev, linux-config-6.1
> Suggests: libncurses-dev | ncurses-dev, qtbase5-dev, pkg-config
> Provides: linux-source-6.1:i386 (= 6.1.128-1)
> Description: Linux kernel source for version 6.1 with Debian patches
>  This package provides source code for the Linux kernel version 6.1. This
> source closely tracks official Linux kernel releases.  Debian's
> modifications to that source consist of security fixes, bug fixes, and
>  features that have already been (or are believed to be) accepted by the
> upstream maintainers.
> Homepage: https://www.kernel.org/
> 
> So I go to the file: llinux-source-6.1/drivers/media/usb/uvc/uvc_video.c
> 
> And do a grep for : "Found multiple Units"
> And no hits, which is correct, the rollback removed the code that added the
> "Found multiple Units"
> 
> If I go back to a previous version of the kernel code: 6.1.124-1
> And do the same grep: "Found multiple Units"
> 774: dev_err(&dev->udev->dev, "Found multiple Units with ID %u\n", id);
> 
> So here we clearly have the code.
> 
> So back to my log from journalctl:
> 
> Feb 11 23:25:31 lenovo-m83 kernel: Run /init as init process
> Feb 11 23:25:31 lenovo-m83 kernel:   with arguments:
> Feb 11 23:25:31 lenovo-m83 kernel:     /init
> Feb 11 23:25:31 lenovo-m83 kernel:   with environment:
> Feb 11 23:25:31 lenovo-m83 kernel:     HOME=/
> Feb 11 23:25:31 lenovo-m83 kernel:     TERM=linux
> Feb 11 23:25:31 lenovo-m83 kernel:
>  BOOT_IMAGE=/boot/vmlinuz-6.1.0-31-amd64
> ........
> Feb 11 23:25:33 lenovo-m83 kernel: usb 2-1: Found multiple Units with ID 5
> 
> Kernel 6.1.0-31-amd64.....which should be built from linux-source
> 6.1.128-1 that does not have that version of the driver, as far as I
> understand.
> 
> The last kernel that worked good was : 6.1.0-28-amd64.
> 
> 
> So am I understanding the version number wrong in the kernel package?

dpkg-query -W -f '${Package}\t${Version}\n' linux-source-6.1
linux-source-6.1        6.1.128-1

it is present in the /usr/src/linux-source-6.1.tar.xz:

grep -R 'Found multiple Units'
linux-source-6.1/drivers/media/usb/uvc/uvc_driver.c:            dev_err(&dev->udev->dev, "Found multiple Units with ID %u\n", id);

Regards,
Salvatore

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | linux.debian.kernel

csiph-web