linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH AUTOSEL 5.15 17/82] arm64: dts: rockchip: add Coresight debug range for RK3399

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Tue, 9 Nov 2021 19:44:44 -0500
From:   Sasha Levin <sashal@...nel.org>
To:     Brian Norris <briannorris@...omium.org>
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, stable@...r.kernel.org,
        Leo Yan <leo.yan@...aro.org>,
        Chen-Yu Tsai <wenst@...omium.org>,
        Douglas Anderson <dianders@...omium.org>,
        Heiko Stuebner <heiko@...ech.de>, robh+dt@...nel.org,
        pawel.moll@....com, mark.rutland@....com,
        ijc+devicetree@...lion.org.uk, galak@...eaurora.org,
        catalin.marinas@....com, will.deacon@....com,
        devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
        linux-rockchip@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH AUTOSEL 5.15 17/82] arm64: dts: rockchip: add Coresight
 debug range for RK3399

On Tue, Nov 09, 2021 at 03:25:39PM -0800, Brian Norris wrote:
>On Tue, Nov 9, 2021 at 2:17 PM Sasha Levin <sashal@...nel.org> wrote:
>>
>> From: Brian Norris <briannorris@...omium.org>
>>
>> [ Upstream commit 75dccea503b8e176ad044175e891d7bb291b6ba0 ]
>>
>> Per Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/coresight-cpu-debug.txt.
>>
>> This IP block can be used for sampling the PC of any given CPU, which is
>> useful in certain panic scenarios where you can't get the CPU to stop
>> cleanly (e.g., hard lockup).
>
>I don't understand why this is being backported to -stable. First of
>all, it won't work because it's missing dependencies (specifically,
>around the RK3399 clock driver). But even if it did, I don't see how
>this is a candidate for -stable.
>
>Methinks the AI has gone too far again.

Possibly.

We try to take patches that enable existing hardware (or hardware
features) where the logic is already in the kernel but it's missing
something like adding a new PCI ID or a quirk.

This also seems to happen with devicetree files which is why this patch
got pulled in.

I'll drop it if it depends on patches that didn't make it in. Thanks!

-- 
Thanks,
Sasha