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

Groups > linux.debian.kernel > #89295 > unrolled thread

Bug#1113942: 6.16.5 affected, but neither 6.15.3 nor 6.16.1. Looks like a regression between 6.16.1 and 6.16.3.

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#1113942: 6.16.5 affected, but neither 6.15.3 nor 6.16.1. Looks like a regression between 6.16.1 and 6.16.3. Salvatore Bonaccorso <carnil@debian.org> - 2025-09-17 13:20 +0200
    Bug#1113942: 6.16.5 affected, but neither 6.15.3 nor 6.16.1. Looks like a regression between 6.16.1 and 6.16.3. Salvatore Bonaccorso <carnil@debian.org> - 2025-09-21 09:30 +0200
      Bug#1113942: 6.16.5 affected, but neither 6.15.3 nor 6.16.1. Looks like a regression between 6.16.1 and 6.16.3. Salvatore Bonaccorso <carnil@debian.org> - 2025-09-27 17:30 +0200

#89295 — Bug#1113942: 6.16.5 affected, but neither 6.15.3 nor 6.16.1. Looks like a regression between 6.16.1 and 6.16.3.

Hi,

On Tue, Sep 16, 2025 at 05:28:14PM +0200, Philipp Klaus Krause wrote:
> I've now tried some of the kernels at
> https://snapshot.debian.org/package/linux-signed-amd64/
> 
> On 6.15.3 and 6.16.1, I cannot reproduce the issue, but I do see it with
> 6.16.5.
> 
> So the last working version for me is 6.16.1-1~exp1,
> and the first non-working is 6.16.3-1.

I think this should be the same issue as #1114806. There is pending
revert for the next upstream version.

Would you be able to confirm that reverting commit
165a69a87d6bde85cac2c051fa6da611ca4524f6 from upstream fixes the issue
for you? Do you need help building a kernel to confirm this?

But looking at your log, I'm leaning to just merge the two bugs
already.

Regards,
Salvatore

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#89338

Hi,

On Wed, Sep 17, 2025 at 01:09:04PM +0200, Salvatore Bonaccorso wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> On Tue, Sep 16, 2025 at 05:28:14PM +0200, Philipp Klaus Krause wrote:
> > I've now tried some of the kernels at
> > https://snapshot.debian.org/package/linux-signed-amd64/
> > 
> > On 6.15.3 and 6.16.1, I cannot reproduce the issue, but I do see it with
> > 6.16.5.
> > 
> > So the last working version for me is 6.16.1-1~exp1,
> > and the first non-working is 6.16.3-1.
> 
> I think this should be the same issue as #1114806. There is pending
> revert for the next upstream version.
> 
> Would you be able to confirm that reverting commit
> 165a69a87d6bde85cac2c051fa6da611ca4524f6 from upstream fixes the issue
> for you? Do you need help building a kernel to confirm this?
> 
> But looking at your log, I'm leaning to just merge the two bugs
> already.

FWIW, the 6.16.8-1 version (containing the mentioned revert) is now
uploaded to unstable, it needs yet processing from NEW, but once
available it would be great if you can test that (I'm still confident
that your bug and #1114806 are duplicate and so your issue resolved
with 6.16.8-1 as well).

Regards,
Salvatore

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

#89427

Hi Philipp,

On Sun, Sep 21, 2025 at 09:28:09AM +0200, Salvatore Bonaccorso wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> On Wed, Sep 17, 2025 at 01:09:04PM +0200, Salvatore Bonaccorso wrote:
> > Hi,
> > 
> > On Tue, Sep 16, 2025 at 05:28:14PM +0200, Philipp Klaus Krause wrote:
> > > I've now tried some of the kernels at
> > > https://snapshot.debian.org/package/linux-signed-amd64/
> > > 
> > > On 6.15.3 and 6.16.1, I cannot reproduce the issue, but I do see it with
> > > 6.16.5.
> > > 
> > > So the last working version for me is 6.16.1-1~exp1,
> > > and the first non-working is 6.16.3-1.
> > 
> > I think this should be the same issue as #1114806. There is pending
> > revert for the next upstream version.
> > 
> > Would you be able to confirm that reverting commit
> > 165a69a87d6bde85cac2c051fa6da611ca4524f6 from upstream fixes the issue
> > for you? Do you need help building a kernel to confirm this?
> > 
> > But looking at your log, I'm leaning to just merge the two bugs
> > already.
> 
> FWIW, the 6.16.8-1 version (containing the mentioned revert) is now
> uploaded to unstable, it needs yet processing from NEW, but once
> available it would be great if you can test that (I'm still confident
> that your bug and #1114806 are duplicate and so your issue resolved
> with 6.16.8-1 as well).

Now that this version is present in the archive, can you please test
and report back?

Regards,
Salvatore

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

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

csiph-web