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
| ||
|
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).
Powered by blists - more mailing lists