linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 4.4 34/74] arm64: vmemmap: use virtual projection of linear region

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: <3BE88637-7CEF-4445-9CF0-5FCCB97507BE@linaro.org>
Date:	Sat, 12 Mar 2016 13:55:44 +0800
From:	Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@...aro.org>
To:	Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
Cc:	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"stable@...r.kernel.org" <stable@...r.kernel.org>,
	Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4.4 34/74] arm64: vmemmap: use virtual projection of linear region



> On 12 mrt. 2016, at 13:50, Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org> wrote:
> 
>> On Sat, Mar 12, 2016 at 08:51:26AM +0700, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
>>> On 8 March 2016 at 20:45, Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@...aro.org> wrote:
>>>> On 8 March 2016 at 20:44, Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org> wrote:
>>>>> On Tue, Mar 08, 2016 at 05:40:14PM +0700, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
>>>>>> On 8 March 2016 at 07:02, Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org> wrote:
>>>>>> 4.4-stable review patch.  If anyone has any objections, please let me know.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Please hold off on this one. We are seeing some breakage on 64k pages systems
>>>> 
>>>> If this problem is also in Linus's tree, I'd like to keep it in to keep
>>>> things "bug compatible".  Please let me know what fix that I should
>>>> apply to resolve this.
>>> 
>>> I am about to send out the patch that should fix this, so I will put you on cc.
>> 
>> Not sure what happened here, but this patch is in 4.4-stable now, but
>> the fix is not.
> 
> Because the fix came out _after_ I released that kernel?  I can't go
> back in time...
> 

I kind of got the whole chronology thing. I am just surprised you pulled only that patch (and not the fix) anyway, since you knew it would break things, and that a fix was on the way.