linux-kernel - Re: pcibios_scanned needs to be set in ACPI? (was Re: 2.6.25-rc5: Reported regressions from 2.6.24)

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: <alpine.LFD.1.00.0803121553070.3557@woody.linux-foundation.org>
Date:	Wed, 12 Mar 2008 16:02:57 -0700 (PDT)
From:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To:	Greg KH <greg@...ah.com>
cc:	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>, Jeff Garzik <jeff@...zik.org>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Adrian Bunk <bunk@...nel.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Natalie Protasevich <protasnb@...il.com>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, Len Brown <len.brown@...el.com>,
	Guennadi Liakhovetski <g.liakhovetski@....de>
Subject: Re: pcibios_scanned needs to be set in ACPI?  (was Re: 2.6.25-rc5:
 Reported regressions from 2.6.24)

On Wed, 12 Mar 2008, Greg KH wrote:
> 
> What happend in .25-rc was that we now catch these kinds of problems
> (watching for duplicate kobjects to be registered and such.)  So this
> might have always been happening, but no warning was ever produced.

It's not the warning that worries me. It's the apparent oops (keyboard 
leds blinking?) at shutdown/poweroff!

> The reason we aren't shutting down is also due to the way kobjects now
> work.  If you don't clean up properly, they linger around and something
> on the shutdown path (I haven't figured that out yet) doesn't want to
> stop the machine.

.. and that's my issue! We're too late in the game to try to figure things 
out and leave things hanging. The patch broke something, it needs to be 
fixed or reverted. It's been going on too long.

I think it should have been reverted probably two weeks ago already. We 
can re-apply it early in the 2.6.26 series, and then try to fix it right. 

Since there is at least a patch worth trying now, I'll hold off reverting 
it and wait for Guennardi to test the patch, but the fact is, we shouldn't 
have a known-broken kernel for several weeks, when there is a known fix 
for it in reverting a single commit!

We have _way_ too many regressions as it is. Regressions are bad. Ones 
that have known causes and haven't been fixed in three weeks are 
unacceptable.

			Linus
--
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/