linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/2] amd_nb: Add PCI ID for family 19h model 78h

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]

Message-ID: <c45f3a39-2103-6beb-ae6d-5bdf070854e0@leemhuis.info>
Date:   Thu, 11 May 2023 22:09:06 +0200
From:   Thorsten Leemhuis <linux@...mhuis.info>
To:     "Limonciello, Mario" <Mario.Limonciello@....com>,
        Sasha Levin <sashal@...nel.org>
Cc:     Linux regressions mailing list <regressions@...ts.linux.dev>,
        Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@...gle.com>,
        Hans de Goede <hdegoede@...hat.com>,
        "S-k, Shyam-sundar" <Shyam-sundar.S-k@....com>,
        "Goswami, Sanket" <Sanket.Goswami@....com>,
        "Gong, Richard" <Richard.Gong@....com>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
        Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
        "x86@...nel.org" <x86@...nel.org>,
        "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-pci@...r.kernel.org" <linux-pci@...r.kernel.org>,
        Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
        Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>,
        "stable@...r.kernel.org" <stable@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] amd_nb: Add PCI ID for family 19h model 78h

On 11.05.23 21:51, Limonciello, Mario wrote:
> [AMD Official Use Only - General]
> 
> +stable, Sasha
> 
>>> Together with this patch there are now at least two regressions if
>>> -rc1 whch could have been avoided and may impact testability on
>>> affected systems.
>>
>> Are you saying that this patch which fixes s2idle on some random box
>> should've gone to Linus *immediately*?
>>
>> And read my mail again:
>>
>> "Some fixes need longer testing because there have been cases where
>> a fix breaks something else."
>>
>> So yes, I disagree with rushing fixes immediately. If they're obvious
>> - whatever that means - then sure but not all of them are such.
>>
>> --
> 
> Unfortunately, it looks like the broken commit got backported into 6.1.28,
> but the fix still isn't in Linus' tree.
> 
> Sasha,
> 
> Can you please pick up
> https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/tip/tip.git/commit/?h=x86/urgent&id=23a5b8bb022c1e071ca91b1a9c10f0ad6a0966e9
> for 6.1.29 to fix the regression?

FWIW, the stable team afaics usually does not fix anything in stable
trees before it's fixed in mainline. IOW: that fix now quickly needs to
go to Linus to get it quickly fixed in 6.1.y.

Side note: I'll soon post a rewritten section of 'Prioritize work on
fixing regressions' which is part of
Documentation/process/handling-regressions.rst. It among others will
cover this case:

```
* Whenever you want to swiftly resolve a regression that recently also
made it into a proper mainline, stable, or longterm release, fix it
quickly in mainline; when appropriate thus involve Linus to fast-track
the fix. That's because the stable team normally does neither revert nor
fix any changes that cause a regression in mainline, too.
```

Ciao, Thorsten