linux-kernel - Re: Intel 915GM MCHBAR bug

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:	Sat, 06 Jun 2009 09:37:00 +0300
From:	Pekka Enberg <penberg@...helsinki.fi>
To:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
CC:	Woody Suwalski <woodys@...dros.com>, jbarnes@...tuousgeek.org,
	eric@...olt.net, intel-gfx@...ts.freedesktop.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, torvalds@...ux-foundation.org,
	stable@...nel.org, tim.gardner@...onical.com, apw@...onical.com,
	stefan.bader@...onical.com
Subject: Re: Intel 915GM MCHBAR bug

Hi Andrew,

On Sat, 06 Jun 2009 09:14:41 +0300 Pekka Enberg <penberg@...helsinki.fi> 
wrote:
>>>> Wanna show us the patch?
>>>>
>>>> Because the world could certainly do with more i915 bugfixes :(
>>>   
>>> Here is Jesse's patch from 
>>> http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/intel-gfx/2009-January/001186.html 
>>> adopted for 2.6.30-rc8... (needed to redo hunk #3 for i915_gem_tile.c)
>> Yup. I took the two patches from here:
>>
>> https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux/+bug/349314
>>
>> and did the same rediffing on top of 2.6.30-rc8 for the first one.
>>
>> Andrew, do you want me to forward you the (tested) patches or should we 
>> wait for Jesse et al to take care of it?
> 
> Yes, please send them out.

OK, I did that. I am bit unhappy that I had to do it, though. The patch 
dates back to January (!) and Ubuntu folks have been carrying it for a 
while now.

Looking at the amount of reports out in the wild (on Ubuntu forums, 
etc.), I really don't understand why this wasn't submitted earlier. 
Instead, the bug was flagged with low priority because it's "just a 
performance problem." Considering the system is more or less unusable 
for me, I obviously think it's a critical bug fix.

Andrew Morton wrote:
> These might end up being 2.6.30.1 material.

Yes, agreed completely. We probably want ACK from Jesse and Bjorn, though.

			Pekka
--
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/