linux-kernel - Re: [tip: x86/urgent] x86/setup: Call early_reserve

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:   Mon, 20 Sep 2021 15:48:18 -0700
From:   Nathan Chancellor <nathan@...nel.org>
To:     Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
Cc:     Mike Galbraith <efault@....de>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-tip-commits@...r.kernel.org,
        marmarek@...isiblethingslab.com, Juergen Gross <jgross@...e.com>,
        Borislav Petkov <bp@...e.de>,
        Mike Rapoport <rppt@...ux.ibm.com>, stable@...r.kernel.org,
        x86@...nel.org
Subject: Re: [tip: x86/urgent] x86/setup: Call early_reserve_memory() earlier

On Sun, Sep 19, 2021 at 07:15:30PM +0200, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> On Sun, Sep 19, 2021 at 06:55:16PM +0200, Mike Galbraith wrote:
> > On Thu, 2021-09-16 at 10:50 +0000, tip-bot2 for Juergen Gross wrote:
> > > The following commit has been merged into the x86/urgent branch of
> > > tip:
> > >
> > > Commit-ID:     1c1046581f1a3809e075669a3df0191869d96dd1
> > > Gitweb:       
> > > https://git.kernel.org/tip/1c1046581f1a3809e075669a3df0191869d96dd1
> > > Author:        Juergen Gross <jgross@...e.com>
> > > AuthorDate:    Tue, 14 Sep 2021 11:41:08 +02:00
> > > Committer:     Borislav Petkov <bp@...e.de>
> > > CommitterDate: Thu, 16 Sep 2021 12:38:05 +02:00
> > >
> > > x86/setup: Call early_reserve_memory() earlier
> > 
> > This commit rendered tip toxic to my i4790 desktop box and i5-6200U
> > lappy.  Boot for both is instantly over without so much as a twitch.
> > 
> > Post bisect revert made both all better.
> 
> I had a suspicion that moving stuff around like that would not just
> simply work in all cases, as our boot order is very lovely and fragile.
> 
> And it booted just fine on my machines here.
> 
> ;-\
> 
> Anyway, commit zapped from the x86/urgent lineup. We'll have to have a
> third try later.

Could auto-latest get updated too so that it does not show up in -next?
I just spent a solid chunk of my day bisecting a boot failure on one of
my test boxes on -next down to this change, only to find out it was
already reported :/

Cheers,
Nathan