linux-kernel - Re: 4.14.9 with CONFIG

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, 29 Dec 2017 19:59:21 +0300
From:   Alexander Tsoy <alexander@...y.me>
To:     Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Cc:     Greg KH <greg@...ah.com>, Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...e.de>,
        Boris Ostrovsky <boris.ostrovsky@...cle.com>,
        Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
        Borislav Petkov <bpetkov@...e.de>,
        Brian Gerst <brgerst@...il.com>,
        Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>,
        Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
        David Laight <David.Laight@...lab.com>,
        Denys Vlasenko <dvlasenk@...hat.com>,
        Eduardo Valentin <eduval@...zon.com>,
        Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
        Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...hat.com>,
        Juergen Gross <jgross@...e.com>,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>,
        Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>, aliguori@...zon.com,
        daniel.gruss@...k.tugraz.at, hughd@...gle.com, keescook@...gle.com,
        Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        stable <stable@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: 4.14.9 with CONFIG_MCORE2 fails to boot

В Пт, 29/12/2017 в 17:11 +0100, Thomas Gleixner пишет:
> On Fri, 29 Dec 2017, Alexander Tsoy wrote:
> > > Just tested Linus's master branch and it have the same problem.
> > > All I
> > > can catch with a serial console is the following:
> > > 
> 
> So for completeness sake:
> 
>        	  MCORE2=y	MCORE2=n
> GCC5.x	  works		works
> GCC6.x	  fail		works
> GCC7.x	  works		works
> 
> Is that correct?
> 

I haven't tested with GCC7.x, but another user reported [1] that it
also fails. So I guess the table should be:

       	  MCORE2=y	MCORE2=n
GCC5.x	  works		works
GCC6.x	  fail		works
GCC7.x	  fail		works

[1] https://bugs.gentoo.org/642268#c11