Re: 5.10 LTS Kernel: 2 or 6 years?

On Thu, Feb 18, 2021 at 05:19:54PM +0000, Jari Ruusu wrote:

On Thursday, February 18, 2021 4:33 PM, Willy Tarreau [off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

Usually you pick an LTS kernel for a specific hardware. If it
works that's great. But you cannot expect hardware to suddenly start to
work in the middle of a stable kernel. Sometimes it happens (PCI IDs) but
that's basically all and that's not their purpose.

It was the other way around. Fine working in-tree driver got
broken by backported "fixes". I did mention bit-rot.

It did?  Please let us stable maintainers know about, we will always
gladly revert problems patches.  What commits caused the problem?

In-tree iwlwifi worked half-ok on early 4.9.y stable. If
connection somehow de-autheticated (out of radio range or
whatever) it crashed the kernel spectacularly. Eventually that was
fixed and in-tree iwlwifi worked fine on 4.9.y and 4.14.y stable
kernels. On second half of year 2020 (don't remember exactly when)
iwlwifi started causing erratic behavior when some random process
terminated, as if some exit processing left some resources
un-freed or something weird like that. Upgraded to 4.19.y kernels
in hope to fix the issue. Nope, same problems continued there as
well. Replacing in-tree iwlwifi with out-of-tree upstream Intel
version solved the problem for me.

So something in the 4.9.y and 4.14.y stable kernels caused a regression,
can you please do 'git bisect' to let us know what broke?

And if 4.19.0 was always broken, why didn't you report that as well?

How about 5.11, have you tried that?  If not, please do so and report it
to the developers, otherwise how can it ever get fixed?

thanks,

greg k-h

_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel