linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 3.18 00/39] 3.18.53-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] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Fri, 12 May 2017 12:15:10 +0200
From:   Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
To:     Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
Cc:     Tony Lindgren <tony@...mide.com>,
        Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        shuahkh@....samsung.com, patches@...nelci.org,
        ben.hutchings@...ethink.co.uk, stable@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3.18 00/39] 3.18.53-stable review

On Fri, May 12, 2017 at 11:37 AM, Greg Kroah-Hartman
<gregkh@...uxfoundation.org> wrote:
> On Thu, May 11, 2017 at 02:46:37PM -0700, Tony Lindgren wrote:
>> * Matthijs van Duin <matthijsvanduin@...il.com> [170511 14:34]:
>> > On Thu, May 11, 2017 at 02:16:07PM -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote:
>> > > arch/arm/mach-omap2/omap-headsmp.S:60: Error: bad instruction `badr r0,hyp_boot'
>> > >
>> > > I see "badr" used in later kernels, but not in v3.18. Does this possibly
>> > > require some secondary patches ?
>> >
>> > It was introduced in kernel 4.2 by
>> >     14327c662822 "ARM: replace BSYM() with badr assembly macro"
>> >
>> > The correct backport would therefore just be:
>> >
>> > -   adr     r0, hyp_boot
>> > +   adr     r0, BSYM(hyp_boot)
>> >
>> > Right?
>>
>> Or just skip this for v3.18 until somebody actually needs thumb
>> kernel with hypervisor and can provide a Tested-by.
>
> Ok, I'll drop this patch for now, it was added to fix a build warning
> that Arnd found.  I'll wait for a proper backport if people really get
> annoyed by it :)

Are you sure it was one of mine? While it seems like an important
fix, I don't remember seeing it and it doesn't look like a warning fix
but a boot regression.

If I did send you this commit ID, it was probably a mistake on my
end, but then I'd like to find out where I went wrong.

      Arnd