linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 3.10 00/64] 3.10.97-stable review

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20160219222215.GB5737@kroah.com>
Date:	Fri, 19 Feb 2016 14:22:15 -0800
From:	Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To:	Shuah Khan <shuahkh@....samsung.com>
Cc:	Willy Tarreau <w@....eu>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	torvalds@...ux-foundation.org, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
	linux@...ck-us.net, shuah.kh@...sung.com, patches@...nelci.org,
	stable@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3.10 00/64] 3.10.97-stable review

On Wed, Feb 17, 2016 at 08:24:11PM -0700, Shuah Khan wrote:
> On 02/17/2016 04:33 PM, Shuah Khan wrote:
> > On 02/17/2016 04:26 PM, Willy Tarreau wrote:
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> On Wed, Feb 17, 2016 at 01:36:46PM -0700, Shuah Khan wrote:
> >>>>> Compiled, but didn't boot on my test system.
> >>>>> Unfortunately, I won't be able to debug this
> >>>>> until Wednesday.
> >>>>
> >>>> Were you able to figure this out?
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>> I am working on bisect today. I should have something
> >>> for you later this afternoon.
> >>
> >> Just FWIW I have it running here in KVM with a simplified config, so it
> >> might be something related to a specific feature or driver but not
> >> necessarily in the core itself.
> >>
> > 
> > git bisect tells me it is
> > 
> > Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
> >     remoteproc: avoid stack overflow in debugfs file
> > 
> > This commit is also in 3.14.61-rc1 which worked just fine.
> > It is in 4.3.6-rc1 which does fail.
> > 
> > I am building without it now to make sure it is the
> > offending commit
> > 
> 
> Sanity returns. Please remove the following commit:
> 
> Ryan Ware <ware@...ux.intel.com>
>     EVM: Use crypto_memneq() for digest comparisons
> 
> This commit can't stand on its own.  crypto_memneq()
> isn't defined. With this change removed, it all works
> well.
> 
>   CC      security/integrity/evm/evm_main.o^M
> security/integrity/evm/evm_main.c: In function â<80><98>evm_verify_hmacâ<80><99>:^M
> security/integrity/evm/evm_main.c:132:3: error: implicit declaration of function â<80><98>crypto_memneqâ<80><99> [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]^M
>    rc = crypto_memneq(xattr_data->digest, calc.digest,^M
>    ^^M
> cc1: some warnings being treated as errors^M
> make[3]: *** [security/integrity/evm/evm_main.o] Error 1^M
> make[2]: *** [security/integrity/evm] Error 2^M
> make[1]: *** [security/integrity] Error 2^M
> make: *** [security] Error 2^M
> 
> I think I didn't run make clean and ended up with a
> bad install.

Ah, I had removed that right after I did the -rc as Guenter had reported
it being an issue as well.

thanks for tracking this down, and sorry for the duplicated effort.

greg k-h