linux-kernel - Re: 2.6.24-rc1: OOPS at acpi_battery

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:	Tue, 13 Nov 2007 11:35:18 +0300
From:	Alexey Starikovskiy <aystarik@...il.com>
To:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
CC:	Alexey Starikovskiy <astarikovskiy@...e.de>, rjw@...k.pl,
	hannes-kernel@...urebad.de, listen@...fservix.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org,
	Len Brown <lenb@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: 2.6.24-rc1: OOPS at  acpi_battery_update

Andrew,

I can not contact with Len for several days, while the oops on battery 
seems quite important.
It also seem to behave well in -mm tree (as part of Len's acpi-test).
Will you send this patch to Linus without approval from Len or should I?

Thanks,
Alex.

Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Fri, 09 Nov 2007 12:36:43 +0300 Alexey Starikovskiy <astarikovskiy@...e.de> wrote:
>
>   
>> Andrew Morton wrote:
>>     
>>> A> On Thu, 08 Nov 2007 19:35:23 +0300 Alexey Starikovskiy <astarikovskiy@...e.de> wrote:
>>>       
>>>> [remove_cycle_at_battery_removal.patch  text/x-patch (1.7KB)]
>>>> ACPI: Battery: remove cycle from battery removal.
>>>>
>>>> From: Alexey Starikovskiy <astarikovskiy@...e.de>
>>>>
>>>> get_property() should not call battery_update() on absent battery to
>>>> avoid cycle and oops.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Alexey Starikovskiy <astarikovskiy@...e.de>
>>>> Tested-by: Rolf Eike Beer <eike-kernel@...tec.de>
>>>>         
>>> A patch similar to this one but with an identical changelog was merged into
>>> Len's tree on November 2.
>>>
>>> If it had been promptly merged into mainline then quite a lot of people's
>>> time would not have been wasted.
>>>
>>>       
>> Andrew,
>> should I send such patches directly to you/Linus?
>>
>>     
>
> Well if Len doesn't object and you're confident in the changes, why not? 
> Any time we leave bugs unfixed we drive away testers and that impacts all
> parts of the kernel.
>
>   


View attachment "remove_cycle_at_battery_removal.patch" of type "text/x-patch" (1734 bytes)