[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAPcyv4j9N1Yrb2f+WX+ypoV0BEoy1xfjbjVyxpmZeN-0rJRFqQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 20 Jan 2016 15:57:14 -0800
From: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>
To: Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Russell King <linux@....linux.org.uk>,
Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Larry Finger <Larry.Finger@...inger.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] fix CONFIG_IO_STRICT_DEVMEM, do not enable by default
On Wed, Jan 20, 2016 at 3:53 PM, Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org> wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 20, 2016 at 3:48 PM, Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com> wrote:
>> On Wed, Jan 20, 2016 at 3:12 PM, Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org> wrote:
>>> On Wed, Jan 20, 2016 at 2:37 PM, Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com> wrote:
>>>> Larry reports: "My PowerBook G4 Aluminum with a 32-bit PPC processor
>>>> fails to boot for the 4.4-git series". This is likely due to X still
>>>> needing /dev/mem access on this platform.
>>>>
>>>> CONFIG_IO_STRICT_DEVMEM is not yet safe to turn on when
>>>> CONFIG_STRICT_DEVMEM=y. Remove the default so that old configurations
>>>> do not change behavior.
>>>>
>>>> Fixes: 90a545e98126 ("restrict /dev/mem to idle io memory ranges")
>>>> Reported-by: Larry Finger <Larry.Finger@...inger.net>
>>>> Tested-by: Larry Finger <Larry.Finger@...inger.net>
>>>> Link: http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=145332012023825&w=2
>>>> Cc: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
>>>> Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>
>>>> Cc: Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
>>>> Cc: Russell King <linux@....linux.org.uk>
>>>> Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
>>>> Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>
>>>
>>> Acked-by: Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
>>>
>>
>> Thanks!
>>
>>> This should probably be CC: stable, yes?
>>
>> No, this breakage is new for the current merge window.
>
> Ah! Okay, I misunderstood the "4.4" comment. Should that be 4.5-git?
I believe Larry meant latest-Linus (v4.4.0+) when he said 4.4-git.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists