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]
Date:   Thu, 2 Jan 2020 11:25:40 -0800
From:   Tony Lindgren <tony@...mide.com>
To:     Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>
Cc:     Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>, Olof Johansson <olof@...om.net>,
        kernel list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-arm-kernel <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
        linux-omap <linux-omap@...r.kernel.org>,
        Sebastian Reichel <sre@...nel.org>, nekit1000@...il.com,
        Marcel Partap <mpartap@....net>, merlijn@...zup.org,
        martin_rysavy@...trum.cz
Subject: Re: Droid 4 regression in 5.5-rc1, armsoc-soc tree

* Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz> [200102 19:18]:
> > * Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de> [200102 14:48]:
> > > On Thu, Jan 2, 2020 at 3:06 PM Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz> wrote:
> > > 
> > > > # good: [ab818f0999dc73af3f966194d087e9f6650f939f] Merge tag
> > > > # 'omap-for-v5.5/maintainers-signed' of
> > > > # git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/tmlind/linux-omap into
> > > > # arm/soc
> > > > git bisect good ab818f0999dc73af3f966194d087e9f6650f939f
> > > > # first bad commit: [38206c24ab09b4f4c2a57de5c1af0bb2e69cf5b6] Merge tag
> > > > # 'armsoc-soc' of git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/soc/soc
> > > >
> > > > ...and am not sure how to interpret the result, or what to do next :(.
> > > 
> > > This means that either the bisection is unreliable (it might be 100%
> > > reproducible or you mixed up good/bad once), or that the arm-soc
> > > branch was indeed good by itself but had a conflict with some other
> > > change that torvalds merged earlier.
> > > 
> > > I would suggest to go back to the list I had extracted in my previous
> > > email and revert all the commits that I identify there, on top of
> > > linux-5.5-rc4. If some commit is not easily reverted, skip that one
> > > at first.
> > > 
> > > Ideally this gets you a working kernel based on -rc4, and then
> > > you can bisect that to find which revert fixed it.
> > 
> > Also please check your dtb is up to date. We still have a lot of
> > stuff missing from the device tree meaning an old dtb will likely
> > be incomplete for many devices.
> 
> Aha, so it works ok when using matching kernel + dtb.

OK good to hear.

> Is 5.5 kernel with 5.3 dtb situation worth debugging?

Well producing a warning based on something would be good. Not sure
what the logic would be though, checking for some minimum dtb version
required would have to be bumped until we have complete dts data.

Regards,

Tony

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ