linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 4.13 20/27] Revert "firmware: add sanity check on shutdown/suspend"

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: <20170913014034.GA24589@kroah.com>
Date:   Tue, 12 Sep 2017 18:40:34 -0700
From:   Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To:     "Luis R. Rodriguez" <mcgrof@...nel.org>
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, stable@...r.kernel.org,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Gabriel C <nix.or.die@...il.com>,
        Arend Van Spriel <arend.vanspriel@...adcom.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4.13 20/27] Revert "firmware: add sanity check on
 shutdown/suspend"

On Wed, Sep 13, 2017 at 03:22:52AM +0200, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 12, 2017 at 05:47:58PM -0700, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> > On Tue, Sep 12, 2017 at 07:20:08PM +0200, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:
> > > On Tue, Sep 12, 2017 at 10:00:00AM -0700, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> > > > 4.13-stable review patch.  If anyone has any objections, please let me know.
> > > > 
> > > > ------------------
> > > > 
> > > > From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
> > > > 
> > > > commit f007cad159e99fa2acd3b2e9364fbb32ad28b971 upstream.
> > > > 
> > > > This reverts commit 81f95076281fdd3bc382e004ba1bce8e82fccbce.
> > > 
> > > I'm not convinced reverting this commit is the right thing to do at
> > > this point given it would seem other errors were happening prior to
> > > v4.13 and this commit would rather just bring to light the core of
> > > the issue which needs to be addressed.
> > 
> > Given that this fixes a reported regression, yes, it is the right thing
> > to do.
> 
> Once 06a45a93e7d34a is also reverted I believe it may be revealed this was
> not a regression after all.

Then we will put it back :)