linux-kernel - Re: ftrace/perf

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:	Wed, 1 Sep 2010 19:32:53 +0200
From:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To:	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
Cc:	Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
	Avi Kivity <avi@...hat.com>, Li Zefan <lizf@...fujitsu.com>,
	kvm-devel <kvm@...r.kernel.org>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: ftrace/perf_event leak


* Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org> wrote:

> On Wed, 2010-09-01 at 14:15 +0200, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> 
> > Thanks for fixing this.
> > 
> > However, can we split this in two patches to ease the backport?
> > 
> > The lack of a module_put() after perf_trace_init() failure is there for a while
> > (the backport needs to start in 2.6.32).
> > 
> > But the lack of a module_put in the destroy path needs a .35 backport only.
> 
> I don't think it really needs two patches. Just notify stable (and 
> Greg KH in particular) about the backport requirements. Greg can 
> handle it ;)

Well, Greg certainly has more than enough to handle, so if there's 
different chunks with different -stable vectors then it would be most 
helpful to him to split things up!

Manually trying to split up patches is both error-prone and 
stress-inducing.

Thanks,

	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/