linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] soc: qcom: pmic_glink: disable UCSI on sc8280xp

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]

Date: Mon, 17 Jun 2024 10:49:40 +0200
From: "Linux regression tracking (Thorsten Leemhuis)"
 <regressions@...mhuis.info>
To: Johan Hovold <johan@...nel.org>, regressions@...ts.linux.dev
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] soc: qcom: pmic_glink: disable UCSI on sc8280xp

On 17.06.24 09:56, Johan Hovold wrote:
> [ Trimming CC list ]
> On Sat, Jun 08, 2024 at 01:45:29PM +0200, Johan Hovold wrote:
>> Disconnecting an external display triggers a hypervisor reset on the
>> Lenovo ThinkPad X13s since 6.10-rc1 which enabled UCSI. Disable it again
>> until the regression has been fixed properly.
>
> I noticed

First off: many thx for telling me about the problem!

> that this one did not make into the regression tracker.

FWIW, it did:

https://linux-regtracking.leemhuis.info/regzbot/regression/lore/20240608114529.23060-1-johan+linaro@kernel.org/

> This
> may be related to the fact that this is the second time I'm disabling
> UCSI on sc8280xp and apparently I used the same patch Subject last time
> so they end up in the same thread on lore:
> 	https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20240608114529.23060-1-johan+linaro@kernel.org/

Kinda. The thread is not the problem. I told regzbot about the subject
for the fix a few days ago and it then dutifully looked up if a commit
with that subject ended up in next or mainline already. Which normally
is the right thing to do -- but in this case it went sideways for
obvious reasons. :-/ Not sure yet how to handle that better; maybe that
falls into the ugly category called "there are bigger fish to fry,
ignore this corner case for now".

Again, thx for telling me about this!

Ciao, Thorsten