linux-kernel - RE: Re: [PATCH 3.4 93/99] iwlwifi: always copy first 16 bytes of commands

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: <0BA3FCBA62E2DC44AF3030971E174FB303DB6D18@HASMSX103.ger.corp.intel.com>
Date:	Sat, 22 Mar 2014 18:43:47 +0000
From:	"Grumbach, Emmanuel" <emmanuel.grumbach@...el.com>
To:	Ben Hutchings <ben@...adent.org.uk>,
	Andreas Sturmlechner <andreas.sturmlechner@...il.com>
CC:	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"stable@...r.kernel.org" <stable@...r.kernel.org>,
	"Berg, Johannes" <johannes.berg@...el.com>,
	Jianguo Wu <wujianguo@...wei.com>,
	Andres Bertens <abertensu@...oo.com>,
	Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
Subject: RE: Re: [PATCH 3.4 93/99] iwlwifi: always copy first 16 bytes of
 commands

> On Sat, 2014-03-22 at 09:51 -0700, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> > On Sat, Mar 22, 2014 at 05:28:02PM +0100, Andreas Sturmlechner wrote:
> > > Original Message from: Greg Kroah-Hartman
> > > <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
> > > >
> > > > Does Linus's tree also have this problem for you?  Or does it work
> > > > there?  If it works there, perhaps we just missed backporting
> > > > something to 3.4?
> > > >
> > >
> > > Other trouble aside, iwlwifi works fine - writing this from today's
> > > build of 3.14.0-rc7+.
> >
> > Hm.  Any linux-wifi developers have an idea?  I can always just revert
> > this patch, but finding out the root cause would be nice...

Reverting the patch is obviously the first thing to do. Finding the root would be nice but I am afraid the time won't allow it... In any case, this patch is meant to avoid a few DMAR fault and possibly some calibration mismatch upon suspend resume. Nothing critical in my eyes.

> 
> Andreas, could you test whether this regression is also present in 3.2.55?
> This patch is based on my backport for 3.2.y.
> 
> Ben.
> 
> --
> Ben Hutchings
> I'm not a reverse psychological virus.  Please don't copy me into your sig.