linux-kernel - Re: [patch 00/42] 2.6.26-stable review

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: <20080912194634.GA32638@khazad-dum.debian.net>
Date:	Fri, 12 Sep 2008 16:46:35 -0300
From:	Henrique de Moraes Holschuh <hmh@....eng.br>
To:	Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>
Cc:	Pavel Machek <pavel@...e.cz>, Greg KH <gregkh@...e.de>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, stable@...nel.org,
	Milan Broz <mbroz@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [patch 00/42] 2.6.26-stable review

On Fri, 12 Sep 2008, Andi Kleen wrote:
> Pavel Machek wrote:
>> On Wed 2008-09-03 23:39:05, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
>>> What about this one:
>>> http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux-2.6.git;a=commit;h=9f497bcc695fb828da023d74ad3c966b1e58ad21
>>>
>>> "ACPI: Fix thermal shutdowns" ?
>>>
>>> It should have been submitted to stable@k.o well before 2.6.26.3, but it
>>> wasn't for some stupid reason.  Then some of us noticed it was missing in
>>> 2.6.26.3, and gave everyone a head's up, but it was too late for 2.6.26.3.
>>>
>>> And now it also apparently failed to make it to 2.6.26.4?
>>>
>>> As far as I recall, without this patch, all X6* ThinkPads that are not in
>>> absolute top-notch thermal condition heat up until they are forced to
>>> shutdown due to overtemperature (thus, slowly further damaging hardware that
>>> is not in good shape to begin with).
>>>
>>> Greg, is there any way to include the above patch for 2.6.26.4?
>>
>>
>>
>> Agreed. This patch makes thinkpads unusable... and it was actually
>> included in 2.6.26.2...
>
> I guess the best/safest course right now is to just revert in stable.

I am not so sure.  You can fix it with an one-line patch that is in mainline
since before -rc4 and is known to work, or you can drop the _PPC fixes
entirely.  But I presume those fixes were NOT sent to stable gratuitously in
the first place, so it seems safer to just fix them instead of reverting
them.

-- 
  "One disk to rule them all, One disk to find them. One disk to bring
  them all and in the darkness grind them. In the Land of Redmond
  where the shadows lie." -- The Silicon Valley Tarot
  Henrique Holschuh
--
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/