linux-kernel - Re: [mm/debug] fa6726c1e7: kernel_BUG_at

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: <b3e5d138-9e14-826c-82c9-2cec9bd41ca5@c-s.fr>
Date:   Tue, 28 Apr 2020 07:24:52 +0200
From:   Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@....fr>
To:     Qian Cai <cai@....pw>,
        Anshuman Khandual <Anshuman.Khandual@....com>
Cc:     kernel test robot <lkp@...el.com>,
        Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
        Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
        Mike Rapoport <rppt@...ux.ibm.com>,
        Vineet Gupta <vgupta@...opsys.com>,
        Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>,
        Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>,
        Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org>,
        Michael Ellerman <mpe@...erman.id.au>,
        Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@...ibm.com>,
        Vasily Gorbik <gor@...ux.ibm.com>,
        Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@...ibm.com>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
        "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
        "Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill@...temov.name>,
        Paul Walmsley <paul.walmsley@...ive.com>,
        Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@...belt.com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, lkp@...ts.01.org
Subject: Re: [mm/debug] fa6726c1e7: kernel_BUG_at_include/linux/mm.h



Le 28/04/2020 à 04:51, Qian Cai a écrit :
> 
> 
>> On Apr 27, 2020, at 10:35 PM, Anshuman Khandual <Anshuman.Khandual@....com> wrote:
>>
>> Letting CONFIG_DEBUG_VM_PGTABLE enabled via CONFIG_EXPERT for unsupported
>> platforms i.e without ARCH_HAS_DEBUG_VM_PGTABLE, was a conscious decision
>> meant to expand it's adaptability and coverage without requiring any code
>> (i.e Kconfig) change. The easier it is to enable the test on unsupported
>> platforms right now, more folks are likely to try it out thus increasing
>> it's probability to get fixed on those platforms. That is a valid enough
>> reason to have CONFIG_EXPERT based enablement method, IMHO. Also even with
>> CONFIG_EXPERT set, CONFIG_DEBUG_VM_PGTABLE does not get enabled by default
>> automatically.
> 
> No, I am talking about PAE. There is a distinction between known broken that nobody cares (like arm32) and in-progress/unknown status (like s390).
> 
> Also, it is not very nice to introduce regressions for robots when testing PAE because they always select CONFIG__EXPERT and CONFIG_DEBUG_VM.
> 

Having CONFIG_EXPERT and CONFIG_DEBUG_VM is not enough to get 
CONFIG_DEBUG_VM_PGTABLE set to yes.

By default, CONFIG_DEBUG_VM_PGTABLE is set to no when 
ARCH_HAS_DEBUG_VM_PGTABLE is not set.

Christophe