linux-kernel - Re: What made this bug report better? (was Re: Poking ieee80211_default_rc

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:	Fri, 20 Feb 2009 12:31:07 +0100
From:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To:	Sitsofe Wheeler <sitsofe@...oo.com>
Cc:	Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>,
	Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: What made this bug report better? (was Re: Poking
	ieee80211_default_rc_algo causes kernel lockups)


* Sitsofe Wheeler <sitsofe@...oo.com> wrote:

> On Tue, Feb 17, 2009 at 10:07:27AM +1030, Rusty Russell wrote:
> > 
> > Thanks, done, and I'll send to Linus and -stable immediately.
> 
> I'm curious - only two days after I reposted this the problem 
> [1] it appears to have been resolved. When I posted it the 
> first time [2] I only received one reply (privately) and that 
> was from Greg wondering why I had only sent the email to him 
> (which was an unfortunate problem and down to how I was trying 
> to send LKML mails at the time).
> 
> What happened this time that made things succesful? Was the 
> original mail too big? Did it not make it to the list?
> 
> [1] http://groups.google.com/group/fa.linux.kernel/browse_frm/thread/2a816ca521d72494/bd607c7e143def6f?#bd607c7e143def6f
> [2] http://groups.google.com/group/fa.linux.kernel/browse_frm/thread/d4a6ce26360613fa/b362792a2debced6?#b362792a2debced6

It does not seem to have made it to everyone - it's not in my 
lkml folder for example. Sometimes vger eats emails. Filing a 
bugzilla for reproducible bugs makes sense - especially if you 
see that no action has been taken by anyone.

But note that even with expanded Cc:s and a properly working 
list it needed Frederic's excellent function-graph trace and 
analysis.

A crash in the wireless code rarely gets tracked back to a core 
kernel module support bug, and it would have taken quite some 
time for someone to make that connection.

	Ingo
--
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/