linux-kernel - Re: regression in 2.6.23-rc8

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

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

Date:	Sat, 29 Sep 2007 01:30:33 -0700
From:	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
To:	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Alexey Starikovskiy <astarikovskiy@...e.de>
Subject: Re: regression in 2.6.23-rc8 - power off failed

Wolfgang Erig wrote:
> Both are bad.
> Two different systems and two different bisections.
> I sent the last step of each.

>>> $ git bisect good 
>>> Bisecting: 0 revisions left to test after this 
>>> [626073132b381684c4983e0d911e9aceb32e2cbc] Assembly header and main routine for new x86 setup code 
>> OK, so which one is the bad one?
> 
> This problem (no power off) persists after pull some minutes ago.
> Sorry for the confusion.
> 

I believe there must have been something wrong here (possibly
inconsistent experiments?)  This checkin has *zero code changes* from
the previous one (and next one) -- the kernel should have been binarily
identical to the previous one.  The code introduced in this checkin
doesn't even get compiled until two checkins later,
4fd06960f120e02e9abc802a09f9511c400042a5.

	-hpa
-
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/