linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2] parport: register driver later

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Tue, 05 Apr 2016 18:47:36 +0530
From:	Sudip Mukherjee <sudipm.mukherjee@...il.com>
To:	Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
CC:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, stable@...r.kernel.org,
	Ross Zwisler <ross.zwisler@...ux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] parport: register driver later

On Tuesday 05 April 2016 06:28 PM, Greg KH wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 05, 2016 at 06:26:08AM +0100, Sudip Mukherjee wrote:
>> On Mon, Mar 07, 2016 at 10:32:55AM -0700, Ross Zwisler wrote:
>>> On Sun, Mar 06, 2016 at 08:40:10PM +0530, Sudip Mukherjee wrote:
>>>> If the parport bus is not yet registered and any device using parallel
>>>> port tries to register with the bus we get a stackdump with a message
>>>> of Kernel bug.
>>>>
>>>> Reported-by: Fengguang Wu <fengguang.wu@...el.com>
>>>> Cc: <stable@...r.kernel.org> # 4.2+
>>>> Signed-off-by: Sudip Mukherjee <sudip.mukherjee@...ethink.co.uk>
>>>> ---
>>>>
>>>> Hi Ross,
>>>> Can you please test this patch in your setup. This is a respin of the
>>>> previous patch in another way.
>>>
>>> Yep, this also solves the issue for me.
>>>
>>> Tested-by: Ross Zwisler <ross.zwisler@...ux.intel.com>
>>
>> Hi Greg,
>> If this patch is ok, can we please have it in v4.6 .
>> Anyway, the problem patch which this patch tried to fix has already
>> been reverted by Linus -
>> 1701f680407c ("Revert "ppdev: use new parport device model"") but we still
>> can have problem with the other devices that use parport.
>>
>> BTW, I know you are busy, but in these situations where I need to have
>> the fix urgently in the tree, is there any other way to solve the purpose?
>> I feel it was incompetency on my part where Linus had to interfere and
>> revert a patch even though the fix was already posted.
>
> A bit better commit message here would have caused me to notice it.
> Something like "Revert a broken patch because it crashes all of our
> machines without it!!!" would be a hint it needed to go in :)

Well. its actually my fault. Previously I used to ping and remind you if 
there is something urgent which needed to go in before your tree closes. 
But this time I got busy with the job change and traveling and 
everything was a mess on my side.
So, now that the ppdev patch has been reverted by Linus, what do you 
suggest that we do? I will say, to have this patch as a temporary fix 
(for other devices) while I work on the deferred probe for parport which 
will solve the problem.

regards
sudip