linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 4.10 000/167] 4.10.2-stable review

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]

Date:   Fri, 10 Mar 2017 17:32:15 -0800
From:   Kevin Hilman <khilman@...libre.com>
To:     Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>
Cc:     "kernelci.org bot" <bot@...nelci.org>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
        akpm@...ux-foundation.org, Shuah Khan <shuahkh@....samsung.com>,
        patches@...nelci.org,
        Ben Hutchings <ben.hutchings@...ethink.co.uk>,
        stable@...r.kernel.org, Andy Gross <andy.gross@...aro.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4.10 000/167] 4.10.2-stable review

On Fri, Mar 10, 2017 at 5:04 PM, Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net> wrote:
> On 03/10/2017 03:52 PM, Kevin Hilman wrote:
>>
>> On Fri, Mar 10, 2017 at 3:24 PM, Kevin Hilman <khilman@...libre.com>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> kernelci.org bot <bot@...nelci.org> writes:
>>>
>>>> stable-rc boot: 541 boots: 6 failed, 500 passed with 34 offline, 1
>>>> conflict (v4.10.1-168-gcdc1f9d24aac)
>>>>
>>>> Full Boot Summary:
>>>> https://kernelci.org/boot/all/job/stable-rc/kernel/v4.10.1-168-gcdc1f9d24aac/
>>>> Full Build Summary:
>>>> https://kernelci.org/build/stable-rc/kernel/v4.10.1-168-gcdc1f9d24aac/
>>>>
>>>> Tree: stable-rc
>>>> Branch: local/linux-4.10.y
>>>> Git Describe: v4.10.1-168-gcdc1f9d24aac
>>>> Git Commit: cdc1f9d24aac385a7fe4611d7b42f51e20f49cdb
>>>> Git URL:
>>>> http://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/stable/linux-stable-rc.git
>>>> Tested: 101 unique boards, 25 SoC families, 30 builds out of 204
>>>>
>>>> Boot Regressions Detected:
>>>>
>>>> arm:
>>>>
>>>>     multi_v7_defconfig+CONFIG_PROVE_LOCKING=y:
>>>>         am335x-pepper:
>>>>             lab-baylibre-seattle: new failure (last pass:
>>>> v4.10-21-gd23a9821d397)
>>>
>>>
>>> This one is a new regression, and a first attempt at bisect was
>>> inconclusive.
>>
>>
>> Bisect fingered the commit below.  I confirmed that reverting that
>> commit on top of stable-rc/linux-4.10.y gets this am335x-pepper
>> platform booting again.   What's rather strange is that this boot test
>> is using a .cpio.gz initramfs, and not using any ext4 filesystem.
>>
>
> Does that even make sense ? Just wondering, after the problems we are
> currently
> experiencing with nios2. Those "bisected" as well to a commit associated
> with
> code which never executed. It turned out that the change in code size caused
> completely unrelated memory overwrites to be observed. Reverting the patch
> in
> question also seemed to "fix" the problem. Only, of course, that wasn't
> true.
>
> Maybe something similar is happening here ?

Right, I'm not confident at all in what's actually going wrong here,
but I ran out of time to keep digging, so I thought I'd at least
report the results.

Kevin