linux-kernel - Re: 2.9.29.2: ide-tape: panic when probing device at boot

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: <200905180532.n4I5Wxa1031243@turbo.physics.adelaide.edu.au>
Date:	Mon, 18 May 2009 15:02:59 +0930 (CST)
From:	Jonathan Woithe <jwoithe@...sics.adelaide.edu.au>
To:	petkovbb@...il.com
Cc:	bzolnier@...il.com (Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz),
	jwoithe@...sics.adelaide.edu.au (Jonathan Woithe),
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-ide@...r.kernel.org,
	tj@...nel.org (Tejun Heo)
Subject: Re: 2.9.29.2: ide-tape: panic when probing device at boot

> On Sat, May 09, 2009 at 05:57:49PM +0200, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote:
> > 
> > [ cc:ing linux-ide and knowledgeable people ]
> > 
> > Borislav/Tejun:
> > Is the 2.6.29 problem the same thing that was fixed recently?
> 
> I'll let Tejun answer that one since I don't get an oops. However, now
> that I have an ide-tape hardware here, I do get something DMA-related
> failing during boot ...
> :
> and more specifically the bad DMA info in identify block thing above. I
> haven't looked into it yet but its next on my TODO.

Cool.

> > Should I just push commit 1e75540ec5202cae63cd238c86bd880e3d496546
> > ("ide-tape: remove back-to-back REQUEST_SENSE detection") to Linus
> > or there is more needed to bring ide-tape to the world of living?
>
> The oops will probably fixed the above commit.  I don't have much idea
> about the DMA problem on 2.6.24 tho.  But even with the above commit
> fixed, I doubt it would work.  The buffer allocation code is broken
> and reliably triggered OOM on my test machine.  While trying to locate
> the bug, I realized the complex code didn't do much good to begin with
> and just stripped it down, so I didn't actually tracked down the
> actual bug && the patch to simplify buffer management is way too large
> for 2.6.29, so unless someone is willing to hunt down the bug just for
> 2.6.29, we're kind of stuck.  :-(

So I take it that 2.6.30 (or one of the RCs) is worth trying (at least in so
far as preventing the oops on boot)?

> ... and I'm afraid we'll have to do some serious bugfixing since this
> driver is behaving really funny :). Stay tuned, I'm on it.

Ok, I'll keep an eye out for updates.  Presumedly we're talking 2.6.31 or
.32 here.

Regards
  jonathan
--
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/