linux-kernel - Re: send_IPI_mask_bitmask() (Re: 2.6.21 known regressions (v2) (for -stable team))

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:	Sun, 29 Apr 2007 10:25:22 +0200
From:	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
To:	Len Brown <lenb@...nel.org>
Cc:	venkatesh.pallipadi@...el.com,
	Michal Piotrowski <michal.k.k.piotrowski@...il.com>,
	stable@...nel.org, Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org, Jeff Chua <jeff.chua.linux@...il.com>
Subject: Re: send_IPI_mask_bitmask() (Re: 2.6.21 known regressions (v2)
	(for -stable team))

On Sun, 2007-04-29 at 01:34 -0400, Len Brown wrote:
> > clockevents_notify() is called with the power verify information for an
> > offline CPU. I can handle this in the clockevents code, but I think acpi
> > is the correct place.
> 
> So the CONFIG_GENERIC_CLOCKEVENTS=y case is broken,
> but the CONFIG_GENERIC_CLOCKEVENTS=n below is okay?
> Not immediately clear why both cases can't fail.

True, that's strange. Even more strange is that 2.6.21-rc7 does not have
the problem, but 2.6.21 has. We did not change anything in those code
pathes between rc7 and final.

Jeff, can you please verify which -rcX was the last which did not have
this problem.

Thanks,

	tglx


-
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/