linux-kernel - Re: [1/6] 2.6.21-rc2: known regressions

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, 4 Mar 2007 18:26:19 -0800
From:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To:	Adrian Bunk <bunk@...sta.de>
Cc:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Sid Boyce <g3vbv@...eyonder.co.uk>,
	Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>,
	Marcel Holtmann <marcel@...tmann.org>, linux-pm@...ts.osdl.org,
	maxk@...lcomm.com, bluez-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net,
	Mark Lord <lkml@....ca>, Greg KH <greg@...ah.com>,
	Matt Mackall <mpm@...enic.com>,
	Johannes Berg <johannes@...solutions.net>,
	Albert Hopkins <kernel@...duk.letterboxes.org>,
	Ayaz Abdulla <aabdulla@...dia.com>,
	Jeff Garzik <jeff@...zik.org>, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [1/6] 2.6.21-rc2: known regressions

On Mon, 5 Mar 2007 02:50:31 +0100 Adrian Bunk <bunk@...sta.de> wrote:

> This email lists some known regressions in 2.6.21-rc2 compared to 2.6.20
> that are not yet fixed in Linus' tree.


We seem to have broken an unusually large amount of stuff this time.

partial post-mortem:

- The ACPICA merge landed in -mm super-late: basically it was in mainline
  a week afterwards and saw only a single -mm release.

  Part of the reason for this short period in -mm was that ACPICA had its
  paws all over x86_64 code and conflicted badly with significant changes
  in the x86_64 tree.

  That happens sometimes.  But when it does, the mess lands in my lap
  rather than in the laps of the perpetrators.

  Lesson: keep the code well-factored so that different subsystems don't
  soil each others' kennels.

- The hrtimers/dynticks stuff is simply hard: timekeeping, low-level x86,
  even APICs.  These are areas in which things break a lot, so churning it
  was inevitably going to cause problems.

  Lesson: none, I think.  Low-level x86 support is just hard, and
  changing it breaks things.


So that accounts for _some_ of the damage, but I wonder if there's more to
it than that.

-
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/