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: <388beb72-c7e6-745a-ad39-cfbde201f373@gmx.net>
Date:   Thu, 17 Oct 2019 19:52:32 +0200
From:   Stefan Wahren <wahrenst@....net>
To:     Daniel Wagner <dwagner@...e.de>
Cc:     Woojung Huh <woojung.huh@...rochip.com>,
        Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        UNGLinuxDriver@...rochip.com,
        bcm-kernel-feedback-list@...adcom.com,
        linux-rpi-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
        linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: lan78xx and phy_state_machine

Hi Daniel,

Am 17.10.19 um 19:41 schrieb Daniel Wagner:
> Hi Stefan,
>
> On Thu, Oct 17, 2019 at 07:05:32PM +0200, Stefan Wahren wrote:
>> Am 17.10.19 um 08:52 schrieb Daniel Wagner:
>>> On Wed, Oct 16, 2019 at 05:51:07PM +0200, Andrew Lunn wrote:
>>>> Please could you give this a go. It is totally untested, not even
>>>> compile tested...
>>> Sure. The system boots but ther is one splat:
>>>
>> this is a known issues since 4.20 [1], [2]. So not related to the crash.
> Oh, I see.
>
>> Unfortunately, you didn't wrote which kernel version works for you
>> (except of this splat). Only 5.3 or 5.4-rc3 too?
> With v5.2.20 I was able to boot the system. But after this discussion
> I would say that was just luck. The race seems to exist for longer and
> only with my 'special' config I am able to reproduce it.
okay, let me rephrase my question. You said that 5.4-rc3 didn't even
boot in your setup. After applying Andrew's patch, does it boot or is it
a different issue?
>
>> [1] - https://marc.info/?l=linux-netdev&m=154604180927252&w=2
>> [2] - https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/10888797/
> Indeed, the irq domain code looks suspicious and Marc pointed out that
> is dead wrong. Could we just go with [2] and fix this up?

Sorry, i cannot answer this question.

Stefan

>
> Thanks,
> Daniel
>
> _______________________________________________
> linux-arm-kernel mailing list
> linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
> http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ