linux-kernel - Re: [linux-next] PPC Lpar fail to boot with error hid: module verification failed: signature and/or required key missing

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]

Message-ID: <87a7e82d-0af5-7f9e-6bd6-7e28b238e866@landley.net>
Date:   Fri, 26 May 2017 01:24:48 -0500
From:   Rob Landley <rob@...dley.net>
To:     Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
        Michael Ellerman <mpe@...erman.id.au>
Cc:     Abdul Haleem <abdhalee@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
        linuxppc-dev <linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org>,
        linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-input@...r.kernel.org, Jiri Kosina <jikos@...nel.org>,
        Benjamin Tissoires <benjamin.tissoires@...hat.com>,
        sachinp <sachinp@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [linux-next] PPC Lpar fail to boot with error hid: module
 verification failed: signature and/or required key missing - tainting kernel

On 05/25/2017 04:24 PM, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi Michael,
> 
> On Thu, 25 May 2017 23:02:06 +1000 Michael Ellerman <mpe@...erman.id.au> wrote:
>>
>> It'll be:
>>
>> ee35011fd032 ("initramfs: make initramfs honor CONFIG_DEVTMPFS_MOUNT")
>
> And Andrew has asked me to drop that patch from linux-next which will
> happen today.

What approach do the kernel developers suggest I take here?

I would have thought letting it soak in linux-next for a release so
people could fix userspace bugs would be the next step, but this sounds
like that's not an option?

Is the behavior the patch implements wrong?

Rob