linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2] modules: Only return -EEXIST for modules that have finished loading

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: <20190508105628.GC4102@osiris>
Date:   Wed, 8 May 2019 12:56:28 +0200
From:   Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@...ibm.com>
To:     Prarit Bhargava <prarit@...hat.com>
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Jessica Yu <jeyu@...nel.org>,
        David Arcari <darcari@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] modules: Only return -EEXIST for modules that have
 finished loading

Hi Prarit,

On Tue, May 07, 2019 at 10:54:13AM -0400, Prarit Bhargava wrote:
> Heiko, it would still be good to get a test of this patch from you.  I
> tested this here at Red Hat on some System Z machines.  Without the
> modification made here in v2, the systems failed to boot ~10% of the time.
> After the modification I do not see any boot failures.  I also was
> able to reproduce the boot issue with the acpi_cpufreq driver on a very
> large & fast x86 system which had closer to 100% failure rate without
> the changes in v2.  After the modification in v2 the system has rebooted
> all weekend without any issues.

I gave it a try on a machine that failed quite reliably with your
first patch (the one that was in linux-next and caused problems on
s390) - it now comes up without any issues. Also a machine with 80
CPUs (+SMT2 -> 160 CPUs) comes up without problems.

So everything seems to work. Thanks!