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:   Wed, 23 Nov 2016 21:53:38 +0100
From:   Adam Borowski <kilobyte@...band.pl>
To:     Philip Müller <philm@...jaro.org>
Cc:     "Linux-Kernel@...r. Kernel. Org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Nicholas Piggin <npiggin@...il.com>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
        "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
Subject: Re: BUG: 4.9-rc6 Still "no symbol version" on boot

On Wed, Nov 23, 2016 at 09:08:28PM +0100, Philip Müller wrote:
> > due to following commit it seems the 64bit architecture of linux 4.9-rc
> > is not able to boot at all, as it is unable to find its root device:

> you have to apply following patch also:
> 
> provide-asm-prototypes.h-for-x86.patch:
> https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/9408985/raw/
> 
> @Adam, Nick: Was this patch not yet sent to Linus?

The patch stewed in a kbuild-targetted thread since the morning after -rc1,
Nick has recently requested that it should go through x86 maintainers
instead.  I've sent it there, lemme ping them, as the regression is severe
and 4.9-final is close.

Apologies if I'm doing something wrong, I'm not a real kernel dev and merely
was the person who came here looking for a fix, saw Nick's instructions
and did the legwork implementing them.

Last version (rewritten description) is at:
https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/9439501/
(needs s/oeter/peter/ for a typo in Peter Wu's address)


Meow!
-- 
The bill declaring Jesus as the King of Poland fails to specify whether
the addition is at the top or end of the list of kings.  What should the
historians do?

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ