On Mon, Nov 18, 2024 at 12:05:40PM +0000, Roger Lynn wrote: > On 18/11/2024 10:35, Roger Lynn wrote: > > On 18/11/2024 09:05, Uwe Kleine-König wrote: > >> I guess this is a duplicate of https://bugs.debian.org/1069301. There > >> are some reverts scheduled for 6.1.y, see > >> https://bugs.debian.org/1069301#74 > >> > >> If you can provide test feedback that would be great. > > > > It does appear to be similar, but I see no indication in any of the > > discussion > > of that bug affecting the latest 6.11 and 6.12 kernels, and there are not > > yet > > any later kernels packaged in Debian for me to test. The 6.1 kernel in > > Debian > > stable does not support my bluetooth interface and so does not show the bug. > > It was assumed that #1069301 applied only to 6.1, as a result of a reports of > it > not affecting 6.9-rc5[0], 6.10.11+bpo-amd64[1] and 6.6.13-1~bpo12+1[2]. > > [0] > https://lore.kernel.org/all/ecee3a54-1a09-40fa-afdb-057ca02cb...@leemhuis.info/ > [1] https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1069301#62 > [2] https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1069301#67
Yes, you're entirely right, seems to be a different issue. I took a quick look in the respective source code and checked if there are commits upstream that might address this issue, but I didn't find anything. I think the right thing to do is to report your issue upstream. For someone knowing about the bluetooth stack, the list poisoning might be actionable. Do you want to do that, or should one of the Debian kernel team take care? If you do, please keep 1087...@bugs.debian.org in Cc:. Best regards Uwe
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
