linux-kernel - Re: linux-next: Tree for Aug 1

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: <83936bed-e783-191f-c308-8f8470a0dbf3@roeck-us.net>
Date:   Wed, 1 Aug 2018 18:19:00 -0700
From:   Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>
To:     Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
        James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@...senPartnership.com>
Cc:     Linux-Next Mailing List <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-scsi <linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: linux-next: Tree for Aug 1

On 08/01/2018 05:05 PM, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi all,
> 
> On Wed, 01 Aug 2018 16:00:54 -0700 James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@...senPartnership.com> wrote:
>>
>> So what seems to be happening to cause this is that there's a patch
>> somewhere between the merge base of my scsi-next series and the next
>> tree and the patch just before scsi-next was actually merged that
>> actually causes a boot failure with blk-mq enabled.  Could you try to
>> find this patch?  I think the way to do it is to try to bisect this
>> range of linux-next using the command line
>>
>> scsi_mod.use_blk_mq=1
>>
>> Which forces block mq to be the default and seeing where the first boot
>> failure is (you don't need my scsi-next tree merged to do this because
>> all the offending patch does is flip the default state of the above
>> flag).
> 
> So this means using v4.8-rc1 as the first good commit and 453f1d821165
> ("Merge remote-tracking branch 'cgroup/for-next'") as the first bad
> (assuming that this latter fails to boot with "scsi_mod.use_blk_mq=1").
> 

Puzzled. Same results. 453f1d821165 works with both scsi_mod.use_blk_mq=0
and scsi_mod.use_blk_mq=1. next-20180801 works with scsi_mod.use_blk_mq=0
and fails with scsi_mod.use_blk_mq=1. Bisect still points to the same commit
(which just changes the default) as culprit. I know that doesn't make sense.
I'll need to think about it.

Guenter