linux-kernel - Re: applesmc oops in 3.10/3.11

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: <C10D98EE-28FE-4BFE-BDE5-1EAABF112AC2@colorremedies.com>
Date:	Tue, 1 Oct 2013 09:33:13 -0600
From:	Chris Murphy <bugzilla@...orremedies.com>
To:	Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>
Cc:	Henrik Rydberg <rydberg@...omail.se>,
	Josh Boyer <jwboyer@...oraproject.org>, khali@...ux-fr.org,
	lm-sensors@...sensors.org,
	"Linux-Kernel@...r. Kernel. Org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: applesmc oops in 3.10/3.11


On Oct 1, 2013, at 9:19 AM, Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net> wrote:

> On Tue, Oct 01, 2013 at 12:55:26PM +0200, Henrik Rydberg wrote:
>>>> Warning message triggered with 3.12.0-0.rc3.git0.1.fc21.x86_64.
>>>> 
>>>> [   10.886016] applesmc: key count changed from 261 to 1174405121
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> Explains the crash, but the new key count is very wrong. 1174405121 = 0x46000001.
>>> Which I guess explains the subsequent memory allocation error in the log.
>>> 
>>> Henrik, any idea what might be going on ? Is it possible that the previous
>>> command failure leaves some state machine in a bad state ?
>> 
>> I seem to recall a report on another similar state problem on newer
>> machines, so maybe, yes. Older machines seem fine, I have never
>> encountered the problem myself. Here is a patch to test that
>> theory. It has been tested to be pretty harmless on two different
>> generations.
>> 
>> I really really do not want to add an 'if (value is insane)' check ;-)
>> 
> Chris,
> 
> any chance you can load this patch on an affected machine so we can get
> test feedback ? This one is too experimental to submit upstream without
> knowing that it really fixes the problem.

Yes. What kernel.org source version should I apply it against? I'd use the non-debug config file from an equivalent version Fedora kernel, unless asked otherwise. And also should I test it on other vintages? I have here MBP4,1(2008); MBP8,2(2011), and MBP10,2(2012).

Chris--
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/