linux-kernel - Re: 2.6.24-rc4-git5: Reported regressions from 2.6.23

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]

Message-Id: <200712091520.04740.rjw@sisk.pl>
Date:	Sun, 9 Dec 2007 15:20:03 +0100
From:	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>
To:	Tejun Heo <htejun@...il.com>
Cc:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, linux-ide@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: 2.6.24-rc4-git5: Reported regressions from 2.6.23

On Sunday, 9 of December 2007, Tejun Heo wrote:
> Hello,
> 
> Andrew Morton wrote:
> >> Subject		: PATA scan: ACPI Exception AE_AML_PACKAGE_LIMIT... is beyond end of object
> >> Submitter	: Hans de Bruin <bruinjm@...all.nl>
> >> References	: http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=9320
> >> Handled-By	: Robert Moore <Robert.Moore@...el.com>
> >> 		  Tejun Heo <htejun@...il.com>
> >> 		  Fu Michael <michael.fu@...el.com>
> >> Patch		: 
> >>
> > 
> > A number of other people are seeing the same thing and Tejun is
> > putting in a blacklist of machines which cannot use libata+acpi.
> > That patch is not yet in any git tree which I pull.
> > 
> > AFACIT the machines kepe working OK - there's just some nasty dmesg
> > spew.
> > 
> > If any machines _are_ breaking then this could cause real problems
> > and I'd prefer that we either go for a whitelist or arrange to
> > detect the condition and fall back to non-acpi ata.
> 
> The pending patchset should make ATA ACPI quite resistant to failures.

Are you going to push it for 2.6.24?

> Known bad boards can be blacklisted (currently only one is on the
> list), ATA ACPI is disabled quicker if ACPI evalution fails, execution
> errors are handled better and commands which are intended to help the
> vendor instead of the user are filtered.  So, I think we have enough
> safety nets.

Sounds good.  :-)

Thanks,
Rafael
--
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/