Package Details: linux-ck 6.9.10-1

Git Clone URL: https://aur.archlinux.org/linux-ck.git (read-only, click to copy)
Package Base: linux-ck
Description: The Linux kernel and modules with ck's hrtimer patches
Upstream URL: https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Linux-ck
Licenses: GPL-2.0-only
Provides: KSMBD-MODULE, VIRTUALBOX-GUEST-MODULES, WIREGUARD-MODULE
Replaces: virtualbox-guest-modules-arch, wireguard-arch
Submitter: graysky
Maintainer: graysky
Last Packager: graysky
Votes: 458
Popularity: 0.148826
First Submitted: 2011-07-22 14:51 (UTC)
Last Updated: 2024-07-20 12:19 (UTC)

Latest Comments

« First ‹ Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 .. 307 Next › Last »

gbin commented on 2023-04-11 01:34 (UTC) (edited on 2023-04-11 01:46 (UTC) by gbin)

I have the same one: 57c562c3cd2753f232549cab05c8ad770ed848ae86401619c7581bdffaeea4fe

I just checked the given signature for the file with this hash:

sal ➜  Downloads  xz -cd linux-6.2.10.tar.xz | gpg --verify linux-6.2.10.tar.sign -                                    
gpg: Signature made Thu 06 Apr 2023 05:13:42 AM CDT
gpg:                using RSA key 647F28654894E3BD457199BE38DBBDC86092693E
gpg: Good signature from "Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>" [unknown]
gpg:                 aka "Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@kernel.org>" [unknown]
gpg:                 aka "Greg Kroah-Hartman (Linux kernel stable release signing key) <greg@kroah.com>" [unknown]
gpg: WARNING: This key is not certified with a trusted signature!
gpg:          There is no indication that the signature belongs to the owner.
Primary key fingerprint: 647F 2865 4894 E3BD 4571  99BE 38DB BDC8 6092 693E

graysky commented on 2023-04-10 16:30 (UTC)

I agree/I get the same checksum

BS86 commented on 2023-04-10 16:12 (UTC) (edited on 2023-04-10 16:23 (UTC) by BS86)

something is strange.

On my notebook I could build the update on release day. on my Desktop that I can only update now, I get a sha256sum mismatch when trying to build. No matter how often I download https://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/v6.x/linux-6.2.10.tar.xz the sha256sum I get is 57c562c3cd2753f232549cab05c8ad770ed848ae86401619c7581bdffaeea4fe not 7de856a284e57e23b8744b2708fe49d49aebe3510c3eee2dd6342e3b5e46ecf2 like expected in the PKGBUILD - is upstream broken/infected or is something off on my end?

Edit: I did now download the file on my phone using mobile internet, and the sha256sum is 57c562c3cd2753f232549cab05c8ad770ed848ae86401619c7581bdffaeea4fe too - so something definitely changed upstream after the release ...

graysky commented on 2023-03-26 11:34 (UTC)

Thanks @glitsj16 - I will update the repo with 6.2.8-2. Others please comment here if you notice any performance regressions.

glitsj16 commented on 2023-03-25 06:42 (UTC)

Building 6.2.8-2 in progress. But after your latest rebase the ck-hrtimer patches are exactly the same as what I used in my 6.2.7-1 / 6.2.8-1. Can confirm both build fine. Didn't notice any regressions or performance drops compared to 6.1.12-1 (the latest available in your repo). All in all I think the 6.2.y is looking good now.

graysky commented on 2023-03-25 06:11 (UTC) (edited on 2023-03-25 06:14 (UTC) by graysky)

Ah, I missed that one. See here: https://github.com/graysky2/linux-patches/commit/a8be5531ff07e300525c20bdbbe38cc6a665a0c4

Does building 6.2.8-2 work for you? Any performance issues?

glitsj16 commented on 2023-03-25 02:46 (UTC)

@graysky I do notice a difference between our 0004-hrtimer-Replace-all-schedule-timeout-1-with-schedule.patch files. Here's mine:

https://gist.github.com/glitsj16/b082da47c46ef9f3cb444798b32b35f7

glitsj16 commented on 2023-03-24 08:31 (UTC)

@graysky I'm doing a rebuild of 6.2.8 using your rebased patches right now. My earlier build didn't have the 0002-bpf-x86-Fix-IP-after-emitting-call-depth-accounting.patch, so I included that too. Will post the results here asap. Thanks for your work!

graysky commented on 2023-03-24 07:59 (UTC)

Thanks @glitsj16

I applied it and rebased. In doing so I found that I had to change 0004-hrtimer-Replace-all-schedule-timeout-1-with-schedule.patch ... can you take a look at that and let me know if I did it correctly? Building 6.2.8 was successful.

https://github.com/graysky2/linux-patches/commit/a27ac12de07749d0c935249d5031514b6cbd1a35

glitsj16 commented on 2023-03-22 22:01 (UTC)

I am getting a similar error. I need some help rebasing 6.2 into the patches.

@graysky Here's my attempt at fixing the rebase: https://gist.github.com/glitsj16/46ba4eebbde9727577c2a2075dfda3c1 - tested with 6.2.7 (6.2.8 is building right now).

« First ‹ Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 .. 307 Next › Last »