linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 5.4 51/52] x86/hpet: Use another crystalball to evaluate HPET usability

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: <20211011072645.02d5ce1b@kicinski-fedora-pc1c0hjn.dhcp.thefacebook.com>
Date:   Mon, 11 Oct 2021 07:26:45 -0700
From:   Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
To:     Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, stable@...r.kernel.org,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>,
        Kai-Heng Feng <kai.heng.feng@...onical.com>,
        Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5.4 51/52] x86/hpet: Use another crystalball to evaluate
 HPET usability

On Mon, 11 Oct 2021 16:05:50 +0200 Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> > FWIW I've never seen any problems prior to Paul's rework of bad clock
> > detection in 5.13. Backports to 5.4 and 5.10 are not necessary.  
> 
> Given that the hardware is still just as broken in those older kernels,
> why not?

Just filling in with extra context, I did say "FWIW" ;)

I don't use 5.4 nor do I understand the consequences of bad hpet 
well enough to comment on risk vs reward here. By consequences 
of bad hpet I mean whether its going to impact anything beyond
the tsc -> hpet fallback (which doesn't impact <5.13).