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  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]
Date:   Wed, 21 Sep 2016 02:27:10 +0200
From:   "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>
To:     Bjorn Helgaas <helgaas@...nel.org>
Cc:     Tyler Baicar <tbaicar@...eaurora.org>, lenb@...nel.org,
        bhelgaas@...gle.com, paul.gortmaker@...driver.com,
        sudipm.mukherjee@...il.com, axboe@...com,
        izumi.taku@...fujitsu.com, linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-pci@...r.kernel.org, bp@...e.de
Subject: Re: [PATCH V2 0/2] Correct AER severity for printing AER information

On Tuesday, September 20, 2016 02:41:03 PM Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 14, 2016 at 03:14:44PM -0600, Tyler Baicar wrote:
> > AER severity handling has two issues that cause the AER information to
> > be printed incorrectly. The first issue is that the function to calculate
> > the AER severity is called twice in the code path to print the AER
> > information. The second issue is that the original call to calculate the
> > AER severity expects the CPER severity but is recieving the GHES
> > severity.
> > 
> > V2: Fix minor typo in commit text.
> > 
> > V1: https://lkml.org/lkml/2016/9/12/1075
> > 
> > Tyler Baicar (2):
> >   PCI/AER: Remove duplicate AER severity translation
> >   acpi: apei: send correct severity to calculate AER severity
> > 
> >  drivers/acpi/apei/ghes.c               | 2 +-
> >  drivers/pci/pcie/aer/aerdrv_errprint.c | 6 ++----
> >  include/linux/aer.h                    | 2 +-
> >  3 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
> 
> I applied both to pci/aer for v4.9, thanks!
> 
> Rafael, the second one is strictly ACPI, and I'd be happy to let you
> deal with it if you prefer.

It can go in via PCI I think.  Either way is fine by me actually. :-)

Thanks,
Rafael

Powered by blists - more mailing lists