linux-kernel - Re: SATA exceptions with 2.6.20-rc5

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Sun, 21 Jan 2007 09:36:18 +0100
From:	Björn Steinbrink <B.Steinbrink@....de>
To:	Robert Hancock <hancockr@...w.ca>
Cc:	Jeff Garzik <jeff@...zik.org>, Chr <chunkeey@....de>,
	Alistair John Strachan <s0348365@....ed.ac.uk>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, htejun@...il.com,
	jens.axboe@...cle.com, lwalton@...l.com
Subject: Re: SATA exceptions with 2.6.20-rc5

On 2007.01.21 00:39:20 -0600, Robert Hancock wrote:
> Björn Steinbrink wrote:
> >On 2007.01.20 22:34:27 -0500, Jeff Garzik wrote:
> >>Robert Hancock wrote:
> >>>change in 2.6.20-rc is either causing or triggering this problem. It 
> >>>would be useful if you could try git bisect between 2.6.19 and 
> >>>2.6.20-rc5, keeping the latest sata_nv.c each time, and see if that 
> >>
> >>Yes, 'git bisect' would be the next step in figuring out this puzzle.
> >>
> >>Anybody up for it?
> >
> >I'll go for it, but could I get an explanation how that could lead to a
> >different result than my last bisection? I see the difference of keeping
> >sata_nv.c but my brain can't wrap around it right now (woke up in the
> >middle of the night and still not up to speed...).
> 
> Whatever the problem is, only seems to show up when ADMA is enabled, and 
> so the patch that added ADMA support shows up as the culprit from your 
> git bisect. However, from what Chr is reporting, 2.6.19 with the ADMA 
> support added in doesn't seem to have the problem, so presumably 
> something else that changed in the 2.6.20-rc series is triggering it. 
> Doing a bisect while keeping the driver code itself the same will 
> hopefully identify what that change is..

Ah, right... sata_nv.c of course interacts with the outside world, d'oh!

Up to now, I only got bad kernels, latest tested being:
94fcda1f8ab5e0cacc381c5ca1cc9aa6ad523576

Which, unless I missed a commit in the diff, only USB changes,
continuing anyway.

Just to make sure, here's my little helper for this bisect run, I hope
it does what you expected:

#!/bin/bash
cp ../sata_nv.c.orig drivers/ata/sata_nv.c
git bisect good
cp drivers/ata/sata_nv.c ../sata_nv.c.orig
cp ../sata_nv.c drivers/ata/
make oldconfig
make -j4

Where "../sata_nv.c" is the version from 2.6.20-rc5. The copying is done
to avoid conflicts and keep git happy. Of course there's also a version
for bad kernels ;) No idea, why I didn't make that an argument to the
script...

Thanks,
Björn
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/