linux-kernel - Re: linux-next: Tree for June 13: IO APIC breakage on HP nx6325

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: <200806172338.38318.rjw@sisk.pl>
Date:	Tue, 17 Jun 2008 23:38:37 +0200
From:	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>
To:	"Maciej W. Rozycki" <macro@...ux-mips.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
Cc:	Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
	linux-next@...r.kernel.org, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	ACPI Devel Maling List <linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org>,
	Len Brown <lenb@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: linux-next: Tree for June 13: IO APIC breakage on HP nx6325

On Tuesday, 17 of June 2008, Maciej W. Rozycki wrote:
> On Tue, 17 Jun 2008, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> 
> > May I gently ask that the patch ("x86: I/O APIC: timer through 8259A second-chance")
> > be reverted?
> 
>  We're trying to find a solution for a long-standing problem and this
> patch is a step in that direction.  We need to find out exactly what is
> going wrong with the HP nx6325 system and removing the patch would make us
> lose the opportunity to get things right in this area.  At the time I
> submitted that patch I warned a lot of testing would be required before it
> goes upstream and hopefully my request will get honored.  If you do not
> want to participate in testing for whatever reason, you have the right to
> do so, but I insist on the patch to stay at least until we know the source
> of the problem and conclude there is no other way to get it fixed.  Len
> reported he's got the same system and it behaves the same, so I hope he'll
> be able to do the testing if you decide to opt out.

I can do the testing actually, but IMO putting that patch into linux-next was a
mistake.

>  Unfortunately the 64-bit variation has a lot of necessary logging
> disabled by default (as you have now discovered with the need to rename
> apic_printk() to printk()), so my plan is to cook up a patch to enable all
> the available logging facilities around that code first.

Well, that's easy.  I can send you a dmesg output with all of the printk()s in
there functional if that helps, but frankly I don't see how this is going to
get you more information than I've already posted.

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/