linux-kernel - Re: [patch 14/71] USB: EHCI: use the new clear_tt

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: <Pine.LNX.4.44L0.0907291022520.3087-100000@iolanthe.rowland.org>
Date:	Wed, 29 Jul 2009 10:24:55 -0400 (EDT)
From:	Alan Stern <stern@...land.harvard.edu>
To:	Greg KH <gregkh@...e.de>
cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, <stable@...nel.org>,
	<stable-review@...nel.org>, <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	<akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>
Subject: Re: [patch 14/71] USB: EHCI: use the new clear_tt_buffer interface

On Wed, 29 Jul 2009, Greg KH wrote:

> On Wed, Jul 29, 2009 at 09:56:31AM -0400, Alan Stern wrote:
> > On Tue, 28 Jul 2009, Greg KH wrote:
> > 
> > > 2.6.30-stable review patch.  If anyone has any objections, please let us know.
> > > 
> > > ------------------
> > > 
> > > From: Alan Stern <stern@...land.harvard.edu>
> > > 
> > > commit 914b701280a76f96890ad63eb0fa99bf204b961c upstream.
> > > 
> > > This patch (as1256) changes ehci-hcd and all the other drivers in the
> > > EHCI family to make use of the new clear_tt_buffer callbacks.  When a
> > > Clear-TT-Buffer request is in progress for a QH, the QH is not allowed
> > > to be linked into the async schedule until the request is finished.
> > > At that time, if there are any URBs queued for the QH, it is linked
> > > into the async schedule.
> > 
> > Greg, can we hold off on applying this patch to the stable tree?
> > 
> > It turns out that this change causes a WARN_ON to trigger in some 
> > circumstances, and the proposed patch to fix _that_ hasn't yet been 
> > submitted to the mainline because a few people have reported that it 
> > leaks DMA pool memory.  So far there hasn't been much progress in 
> > tracking this down.
> 
> Sure, I'll drop it.  Should I also drop the patch before this one as
> well, which was there only because this patch needed it?

In terms of functionality, it doesn't matter.  I guess you might as 
well.

> Let me know when/if you ever want it added to the -stable trees in the
> future.

I will.

Alan Stern

--
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/