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  PHC 
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
 
Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:   Sun, 22 Nov 2020 10:13:04 +0100
From:   Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To:     Pavel Machek <pavel@...x.de>
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, torvalds@...ux-foundation.org,
        akpm@...ux-foundation.org, linux@...ck-us.net, shuah@...nel.org,
        patches@...nelci.org, lkft-triage@...ts.linaro.org,
        stable@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4.19 00/14] 4.19.159-rc1 review

On Sat, Nov 21, 2020 at 09:37:23AM +0100, Pavel Machek wrote:
> Hi!
> 
> > This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 4.19.159 release.
> > There are 14 patches in this series, all will be posted as a response
> > to this one.  If anyone has any issues with these being applied, please
> > let me know.
> > 
> > Responses should be made by Sun, 22 Nov 2020 10:45:32 +0000.
> > Anything received after that time might be too late.
> 
> CIP testing did not find any problems here:
> 
> https://gitlab.com/cip-project/cip-testing/linux-stable-rc-ci/-/tree/linux-4.19.y
> 
> But reviews indicated two patches that are problematic in 4.19:
> 
> rc-v4.19.155.list: fd2278164808 o: | memory: emif: Remove bogus
> debugfs error handling
> 
> - debugfs still returns NULL in 4.19 so this introducesbug. Itis
>   just a cleanup so it can be reverted.

This can stay, the code still works correctly with this patch applied.

> rc-v4.19.156.list: 7d5553147613 o: | drm/i915: Break up error capture
> compression loops with cond_resched()
> 
> - code still needs to be atomic in 4.19; this probably depends on
>   a42f45a2a, see _object_create(). It does not fix anything severe so
>     it can be simply reverted.

It does not hurt anything either, right?  Have you noticed any
regressions with it applied?

> Tested-by: Pavel Machek (CIP) <pavel@...x.de>

Thanks for testing these.

greg k-h

Powered by blists - more mailing lists