linux-kernel - Re: the wake-on-lan regression from 6.2 (was: Re: Linux regressions report for mainline [2023-04-16])

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: <CAJZ5v0j+VieZvQUXtyEJg47oggji2zgcJ6W9Mnge9Xz867QTJQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Fri, 21 Apr 2023 21:22:24 +0200
From:   "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>
To:     Linux regressions mailing list <regressions@...ts.linux.dev>
Cc:     "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
        David Sterba <dsterba@...e.com>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: the wake-on-lan regression from 6.2 (was: Re: Linux regressions
 report for mainline [2023-04-16])

On Fri, Apr 21, 2023 at 3:49 PM Linux regression tracking (Thorsten
Leemhuis) <regressions@...mhuis.info> wrote:
>
> On 17.04.23 13:38, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > On Sun, Apr 16, 2023 at 10:49 PM Linus Torvalds
> > <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org> wrote:
> >>
> >> On Sun, Apr 16, 2023 at 10:59 AM Regzbot (on behalf of Thorsten
> >> Leemhuis) <regressions@...mhuis.info> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Wake-on-lan (WOL) apparently is broken for a huge number of users since
> >>> 6.2 was released[1]. This is known for 8 weeks now and about 4 weeks ago
> >>> it was bisected to commit 5c62d5aab87 ("ACPICA: Events: Support fixed
> >>> PCIe wake event") we immediately could have reverted. The developer that
> >>> looked into this was even willing to do the revert late March, but then
> >>> got discouraged by a maintainer [2]. But well, a fix was apparently[3]
> >>> finally posted for review last week (to the acpica-devel list); with a
> >>> bit of luck your might get it next week. Still a bit sad that 6.2 is
> >>> broken for so long now, as Greg wants to see it fixed in mainline first.
> >>>
> >>> [1] https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=217069
> >>> [2] https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=217069#c50
> >>> [3] https://lore.kernel.org/all/754225a2-95a9-2c36-1886-7da1a78308c2@loongson.cn/
> >>
> >> I find that bugzilla discussion very confusing, it's not clear what
> >> the status of the patch actually is.
> >>
> >> And the sane lkml thread just says "the patch is under review" without
> >> actually saying *where* said patch is, or where the review is.
> >>
> >> It sounds like it got perhaps into some internal ACPCICA queue? None
> >> of those links are very clear on any of this.
> >>
> >> Rafael?
> >
> > There is a pull request for ACPICA that corresponds to this (IIUC),
> > https://github.com/acpica/acpica/pull/866
>
> Rafael, what happened to this?

It will get fixed, most likely by reverting the offending commit and
most likely during the 6.4 merge window.

Note that ACPICA is involved, so the analogous revert needs to be
submitted there and I'm traveling right now.

Thanks!