| 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
| ||
|
Date: Sat, 29 Sep 2007 11:35:53 +0200 From: Wolfgang Erig <Wolfgang.Erig@....de> To: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com> Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Alexey Starikovskiy <astarikovskiy@...e.de> Subject: Re: regression in 2.6.23-rc8 - power off failed On Sat, Sep 29, 2007 at 01:30:33AM -0700, H. Peter Anvin wrote: > 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. I have done two bisections simultanously and it was late at night. I start again with a fresh tree and better controlled experiments. Wolfgang - 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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists