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 Oct 2022 11:54:01 +0900
From:   Tetsuo Handa <>
To:     Linus Torvalds <>,
        Yury Norov <>,
        Jakub Kicinski <>
Cc:     Borislav Petkov <>,
        syzbot <>,,
        Andrew Jones <>,,
        "David S . Miller" <>,
        Eric Dumazet <>,
        Paolo Abeni <>,
        Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <>,
        Menglong Dong <>,
        Kuniyuki Iwashima <>,
        Petr Machata <>,
        Guo Ren <>,
        "Michael S . Tsirkin" <>,
        Alexander Gordeev <>,,,,,,,
Subject: Re: [syzbot] WARNING in c_start

On 2022/10/17 2:52, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> Anyway, since rc1 is fairly imminent, I will just revert it for now -
> I don't want to have a pending revert wait until -rc2.

Thank you, Linus.

Yury or Jakub, please send a revert request on commit 854701ba4c39 ("net: fix cpu_max_bits_warn()
usage in netif_attrmask_next{,_and}"), for
says that boot is still failing.

> But I actually suspect that the thing we should really do is to just
> remove the check entirely for these functions that are already defined
> in terms of "if no more bits, return nr_cpu_ids". They already
> basically return an error case, having them *warn* about the error
> they are going to return is just obnoxious.

I agree.

Powered by blists - more mailing lists