linux-kernel - Re: BUG: unable to handle kernel paging request from pty

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: <20160229124306.GA22425@khazad-dum.debian.net>
Date:	Mon, 29 Feb 2016 09:43:06 -0300
From:	Henrique de Moraes Holschuh <hmh@....eng.br>
To:	Jiri Slaby <jslaby@...e.cz>
Cc:	Robert Święcki <robert@...ecki.net>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Peter Hurley <peter@...leysoftware.com>,
	Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	stable <stable@...r.kernel.org>, lwn@....net,
	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
Subject: Re: BUG: unable to handle kernel paging request from pty_write [was:
 Linux 4.4.2]

On Mon, 29 Feb 2016, Jiri Slaby wrote:
> On 02/26/2016, 08:59 PM, Robert Święcki wrote:
> > It happens only with 0x6000832 ucode, and Piledriver-based CPUs: i.e.
> > newer AMD FX, and Opteron 300 series (4300, 6300 etc.).
> 
> Ok, I can confirm this is:
> AMD Opteron(tm) Processor 6348
> 
> And:
> microcode: CPU0: patch_level=0x06000836
> 
> Thank all the interested parties!

Jiri, does microcode 0x6000836 *fix* the erratum in microcode 0x6000832?

Or did you mean both 0x6000832 and 0x6000836 have the same erratum discussed
in this thread?

-- 
  "One disk to rule them all, One disk to find them. One disk to bring
  them all and in the darkness grind them. In the Land of Redmond
  where the shadows lie." -- The Silicon Valley Tarot
  Henrique Holschuh