linux-kernel - Re: [GIT pull] CPU hotplug updates for 4.9

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]

Date:   Tue, 7 Mar 2017 22:32:42 +0000
From:   Bart Van Assche <Bart.VanAssche@...disk.com>
To:     "tglx@...utronix.de" <tglx@...utronix.de>
CC:     "torvalds@...ux-foundation.org" <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
        "mingo@...nel.org" <mingo@...nel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "hpa@...or.com" <hpa@...or.com>,
        "akpm@...ux-foundation.org" <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [GIT pull] CPU hotplug updates for 4.9

On Tue, 2017-03-07 at 10:30 +0100, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> That's odd. There was no change related to the hotplug stuff post 4.10
> neither in the core nor in that particular driver.
> 
> I have no immediate clue what to look for aside of asking you whether you
> could do a bisect between 4.10 and 4.11-rc1.

Hello Thomas,

I will keep trying to find the commit that introduced this behavior. The
bisect I ran this morning yielded a commit that only changes ARM code which
does not make sense since I ran the bisect on an x86 system. I guess that
means that during one of the bisect steps I did not wait long enough to see
whether or not the hang occurs and hence that I provided incorrect input to
the bisect process.

Bart.