linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/5] i387: stable kernel backport

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: <4F46C92B.4090508@zytor.com>
Date:	Thu, 23 Feb 2012 15:18:03 -0800
From:	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
To:	Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
CC:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	stable@...r.kernel.org, Raphael Prevost <raphael@...o.asia>,
	Suresh Siddha <suresh.b.siddha@...el.com>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/5] i387: stable kernel backport

On 02/23/2012 03:16 PM, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> 
> And a "clean" 3.2.7 doesn't have that problem?
> 
> Does the same thing happen in Linus's tree at the moment?
> 

Clean 3.2.7 I don't think has that problem, although of course when I
run the stress test it fails on other ways so it's hard to 100% rule out.

Linus' tree doesn't have that problems.

	-hpa


-- 
H. Peter Anvin, Intel Open Source Technology Center
I work for Intel.  I don't speak on their behalf.

--
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/