linux-kernel - Re: Large amount of scsi-sgpool objects

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:	Wed, 4 Mar 2009 01:30:25 +0100 (CET)
From:	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
To:	James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@...senPartnership.com>
cc:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, Jan Engelhardt <jengelh@...ozas.de>,
	Boaz Harrosh <bharrosh@...asas.com>,
	linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	linux-rt-users@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Large amount of scsi-sgpool objects

James,

On Tue, 3 Mar 2009, James Bottomley wrote:
> However, if you base a feature tree off this compromised tree, now
> you're causing extra work for other maintainers who see problems
> reported with this tree, and have to take the time to investigate what's
> going on.

Stop this nonsense. That bug stopped me and Ingo from testing code on
machines with AIC7xxx controllers for quite a while.

The patch sent by the author of the SCSI commit which caused the
breakage in the first place (b60af5b: [SCSI] simplify
scsi_io_completion()) specifically to Ingo in response to Ingo's bug
report seemed to fix it and it did not explode, so it was left in the
-rt origin.patch simply because I forgot about it and there was no fix
in the mainline kernel which would have made it obsolete.

Yes, I should have noticed the memory leak, but ...

> Worse, supposing there is a genuine SCSI bug exposed by the -rt tree
> (say something timing or interrupt related).  So I ask the reporter to
> retry with the regular kernel tree and the bug goes away. Now everyone
> will think "Oh, it's just because of some SCSI crap Ingo put in his
> tree".  Result: the bug goes undiagnosed until it bites several people
> in the field, which is an avoidable result.
> 
> The executive summary is that your "it works for me, so I'm putting it
> in my tree" attitude is damaging our quality process.

So according to your executive summary the full failure of test
machines due to a SCSI bug is not damaging anything. These machines
are^W have been part of the quality process and stopped working due to
wreckage induced by your tree in 29-rc1.

The executive summary is: stop development and testing until SCSI
comes up with a blessed fix.

You have my full understanding that quality processing defined by SCSI
has precedence over general testing.

Once I'm done with cleaning up the mess caused by the crash in linus
tree (w/o any unblessed patches) I'm going to fix the power supply of
the AIC7xxx system to make sure it is stand by when a blessed solution
pops up in the unforeseeable future.

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/