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:   Fri, 28 Feb 2020 15:53:34 -0500
From:   "Theodore Y. Ts'o" <tytso@....edu>
To:     Petr Mladek <pmladek@...e.com>
Cc:     Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky.work@...il.com>,
        Lech Perczak <l.perczak@...lintechnologies.com>,
        Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
        Krzysztof DrobiƄski 
        <k.drobinski@...lintechnologies.com>,
        Pawel Lenkow <p.lenkow@...lintechnologies.com>,
        John Ogness <john.ogness@...utronix.de>,
        Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Subject: Re: Regression in v4.19.106 breaking waking up of readers of
 /proc/kmsg and /dev/kmsg

On Fri, Feb 28, 2020 at 02:02:17PM +0100, Petr Mladek wrote:
> 
> So, I would still prefer to _revert_ the commit 15341b1dd409749f
> ("char/random: silence a lockdep splat with printk()"). It calmed
> down lockdep report. The real life danger is dubious. The warning
> is printed early when the system is running on single CPU where
> it could not race.

I'm wondering now if we should revert this commit before 5.6 comes out
(it landed in 5.6-rc1).  "Is much less likely to happen given the
other random initialization patches" is not the same as "guaranteed
not to happen".

What do folks think?

						- Ted

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ