linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 4.9 52/66] Revert "perf tests: Decompress kernel module before objdump"

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]

Message-ID: <22024334-b52c-2f79-4b99-6eace998d0e9@gmail.com>
Date:   Wed, 5 Sep 2018 13:08:31 -0700
From:   Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>
To:     Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Sasha Levin <alexander.levin@...rosoft.com>,
        stable@...r.kernel.org,
        Pavlos Parissis <pavlos.parissis@...il.com>,
        Lei Chen <chenl.lei@...il.com>,
        Maxime Hadjinlian <maxime.hadjinlian@...il.com>,
        Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>,
        Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@...el.com>,
        Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...nel.org>, David Ahern <dsahern@...il.com>,
        Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
        Wang Nan <wangnan0@...wei.com>, kernel-team@....com,
        Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4.9 52/66] Revert "perf tests: Decompress kernel module
 before objdump"

On 09/05/2018 12:29 PM, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 05, 2018 at 11:50:02AM -0700, Florian Fainelli wrote:
>> On 04/17/2018 08:59 AM, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
>>> 4.9-stable review patch.  If anyone has any objections, please let me know.
>>>
>>> ------------------
>>>
>>> From: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
>>>
>>> This reverts commit 7525a238be8f46617cdda29d1be5b85ffe3b042d which is
>>> commit 94df1040b1e6aacd8dec0ba3c61d7e77cd695f26 upstream.
>>>
>>> It breaks the build of perf on 4.9.y, so I'm dropping it.
>>
>> Sorry to hijack this thread, I was not able to find the original email
>> when the offending patch was included in 4.1.52. So kernel 4.1.52 also
>> has the same problem, can you push a 4.1.53 tag with that patch reverted
>> as well?
> 
> 4.1 is long end-of-life now, I'm not going to be going and updating a
> "dead' kernel for a perf build bug.

Meh, fair enough, I reverted the offending commit, it still points to a
more fundamental problem, there is not always build testing of the tools
being shipped with the kernel unfortunately.

> 
> You shouldn't be using this kernel either :)

Fortunately 4.9 is what we are mostly using these days, still getting
occasional 4.1 kernel support requests unfortunately...
-- 
Florian