netdev - Re: [Bug #14925] sky2 panic under load

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: <201001112150.17166.rjw@sisk.pl>
Date:	Mon, 11 Jan 2010 21:50:17 +0100
From:	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>
To:	Jarek Poplawski <jarkao2@...il.com>
Cc:	"Berck E. Nash" <flyboy@...il.com>, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [Bug #14925] sky2 panic under load

On Monday 11 January 2010, Jarek Poplawski wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 11, 2010 at 08:32:24PM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > On Monday 11 January 2010, Jarek Poplawski wrote:
> > > On Sun, Jan 10, 2010 at 05:36:46PM -0700, Berck E. Nash wrote:
> > > > Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > > > > This message has been generated automatically as a part of a report
> > > > > of recent regressions.
> > > > > 
> > > > > The following bug entry is on the current list of known regressions
> > > > > from 2.6.32.  Please verify if it still should be listed and let me know
> > > > > (either way).
> > > 
> > > BTW, I don't know why Berck didn't experience such a panic before
> > > 2.6.32, but seems not a regression to me. There might be new/more sky2
> > > TX timeouts which trigger this panic and would make a real regression.
> > 
> > Even if the code has always been broken, but it's only become visible after
> > 2.6.32, that still counts as a regression IMO, because now the users are
> > affected who weren't before.
> 
> Right, but:
> 1) someone with a similar but older problem might be mislead a fix is
>    not for them;

Not if the fix changelog mentions the older kernels explicitly.

> 2) someone with exactly this one problem (i.e. Berck ;-) might be
>    mislead "no oops" is enough, while their linux might be still worse
>    than before. (So I intended Berck to re-consider or even re-check
>    this problem wrt. 2.6.31, and maybe even reporting another
>    regression.)

Yes, rechecking the problem with 2.6.31 would be useful.

Rafael
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html