linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 5.2 000/413] 5.2.3-stable review

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: <CA+G9fYsWdmboyquZ=Bs3tkTwRFTzd1yuL0_EVpHOecNi4E_stA@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Thu, 25 Jul 2019 19:35:13 +0530
From:   Naresh Kamboju <naresh.kamboju@...aro.org>
To:     Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>
Cc:     Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Anders Roxell <anders.roxell@...aro.org>,
        Ben Hutchings <ben.hutchings@...ethink.co.uk>,
        wanpengli@...cent.com,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
        patches@...nelci.org, sean.j.christopherson@...el.com,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        lkft-triage@...ts.linaro.org,
        linux- stable <stable@...r.kernel.org>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Shuah Khan <shuah@...nel.org>,
        Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>, jmattson@...gle.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5.2 000/413] 5.2.3-stable review

Paolo,

On Thu, 25 Jul 2019 at 19:17, Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com> wrote:
>
> On 25/07/19 13:34, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> > Any chance you can run 'git bisect' to find the offending patch?  Or
> > just try reverting a few, you can ignore the ppc ones, so that only
> > leaves you 7 different commits.
> >
> > Does this same test pass in 5.3-rc1?

Yes. same test pass on 5.3-rc1
kvm unit test always fetching master branch and at tip
runs the latest test code on all branches
mainline 5.3-rc1 and stable-rc-5.2 branch

>
> Anders, are you running the same kvm-unit-tests commit that passed for
> 5.2.2?  My suspicion is that your previous test didn't have this commit

No.
I see two extra test code commits for 5.2.3
Re-tested 5.2.2 with tip of kvm unit tests sources and vmx test FAILED [1].

Greg,
This investigation confirms it is a new test code failure on stable-rc 5.2.3

> since the symptoms match and the corresponding fix was made in 5.3.

Thanks for your findings.

> Paolo

- Naresh
[1] https://lkft.validation.linaro.org/scheduler/job/837811