/srv/irclogs.ubuntu.com/2011/06/02/#ubuntu-kernel.txt

sconklinlamont: I just posted some test kernels for the NAT/filtering issue, there's a link in the bug. If you have a chance to test those, I'll probably follow with further test kernels, Thanks!02:09
lamontok02:38
lamontsconklin: ^^02:38
sconklinack02:40
=== smoser` is now known as smoser
=== _LibertyZero is now known as LibertyZero
* apw yawns08:35
RAOFMore bees!08:35
jk-BEES!08:35
apwCOVERED in bees08:36
ppisatiapw: are you working today?11:33
apwppisati, yep and here, was that you i heard?11:33
ppisatiapw: so, i have a cve fix that imo is not needed in a branch11:34
ppisatiapw: how does it work? shall someone review it?11:34
ppisatiapw: it's not event in the .y tree11:34
apwppisati, if you believe its not needed, then we do nothing and move on11:35
ppisatiok11:35
apwfor example if the code does not exist which is affected, then we just need to mark the CVE task for that release Invalid11:35
apwand let me know so i can make sure the tracker gets updated11:35
ppisatiactually the code exist, but it's slightly different11:36
ppisatiand it seems the check is already there11:36
apwthen thats fine, we trust the triager (you) to work that out11:36
ppisatiok11:36
ppisatihttps://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/lucid/+source/linux-fsl-imx51/+bug/73702411:46
ubot2Ubuntu bug 737024 in linux-mvl-dove "CVE-2010-4263" [Undecided,In progress]11:46
ppisatithis one is not needed in fsl-imx5111:46
ppisatiand launchpad just ate my comment11:46
ppisati...11:46
ppisatiok, done11:47
ppisatimove it to "Not needed" in the tracker11:47
apwppisati, will do11:47
ppisatisomething strange with one cve fix12:13
ppisatiit's there, so it's not a security problem12:13
ppisatibut the commit message was inverted between 2 patches12:13
ppisatiand then one of them was applied again12:13
apwppisati, so we applied it, reverted it and reapplied it ?12:17
ppisatiapw: nope12:17
ppisatiwait12:17
ppisatiCVE-2011-101612:17
ubot2ppisati: The Radeon GPU drivers in the Linux kernel before 2.6.38-rc5 do not properly validate data related to the AA resolve registers, which allows local users to write to arbitrary memory locations associated with (1) Video RAM (aka VRAM) or (2) the Graphics Translation Table (GTT) via crafted values. (http://cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvename.cgi?name=CVE-2011-1016)12:18
ppisatihttp://people.canonical.com/~ubuntu-security/cve/2011/CVE-2011-1016.html12:18
ubot2ppisati: The Radeon GPU drivers in the Linux kernel before 2.6.38-rc5 do not properly validate data related to the AA resolve registers, which allows local users to write to arbitrary memory locations associated with (1) Video RAM (aka VRAM) or (2) the Graphics Translation Table (GTT) via crafted values. (http://cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvename.cgi?name=CVE-2011-1016)12:18
ppisatiand the twp patches:12:18
ppisatihttp://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux-2.6.git;a=commit;h=fff1ce4dc6113b6fdc4e3a815ca5fd229408f8ef12:18
ppisatihttp://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux-2.6.git;a=commit;h=45e4039c3aea597ede44a264cea322908cdedfe912:18
ppisatinow, on lucid:12:18
ppisatic0cd753 drm/radeon: fix regression with AA resolve checking12:18
ppisati7548efe drm/radeon/kms: check AA resolve registers on r30012:18
ppisati168a4d2 drm/radeon: fix regression with AA resolve checking, CVE-2011-101612:18
ubot2ppisati: The Radeon GPU drivers in the Linux kernel before 2.6.38-rc5 do not properly validate data related to the AA resolve registers, which allows local users to write to arbitrary memory locations associated with (1) Video RAM (aka VRAM) or (2) the Graphics Translation Table (GTT) via crafted values. (http://cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvename.cgi?name=CVE-2011-1016)12:18
ppisati90a458e drm/radeon/kms: check AA resolve registers on r300, CVE-2011-101612:18
ubot2ppisati: The Radeon GPU drivers in the Linux kernel before 2.6.38-rc5 do not properly validate data related to the AA resolve registers, which allows local users to write to arbitrary memory locations associated with (1) Video RAM (aka VRAM) or (2) the Graphics Translation Table (GTT) via crafted values. (http://cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvename.cgi?name=CVE-2011-1016)12:18
ppisatiuhm, ok12:20
apwppisati, well if you are sure the stuff is applied at the end of the pile then we can porbabally ignore it12:20
ppisatigot it12:20
ppisatiinstead of reverting12:20
ppisatithey logicallu reverted the patch using the commit msg12:20
ppisatiand then reapplied it12:20
ppisatiok12:20
apwok so they used a stupid name for the revert, thats fine12:21
cdbsI can see kernels on the mainline PPA, but I can't find any -modules-VERSION packages on kernel.ubuntu.com, will new kernels automatically use modules of the older version already installed on Ubuntu?12:44
cdbsFor example, I'm downloading the 3.0 kernel, so will it re-use the modules debs from the 2.6.39 kernel?12:45
apwcdbs, there are no separate modules packages, they are included in the kenel images 12:47
cdbs:o12:47
cdbsmakes sense12:47
=== Quintasan_ is now known as Quintasan
pmatulisi have many TCP sockets in CLOSE_WAIT states ('till DOS).  i realize this generally means an application bug but is there some quick 'n dirty way to get rid of these states in the meanwhile?14:09
apwpmatulis, if they are real i think they have to be maintained to maintain the TCP protocol correctly14:10
apwppisati, hey, this last commit on the ti-omap4 pull request, is that a CVE fix ?14:10
apw(looks to be), if so then it should have CVE-NNNN-MMMM added abouve your signed-off-by14:11
apwalso as this one has not been reviewed before it seems, it likely should be send out to the list for review and ack before application14:11
pmatulisapw: i'm sorry, i don't understand you.  are you saying 'no' to my question?  will adjusting other state values (sysctl) help (specifically WAIT_TIME)?14:14
apwyou may get some help reducing those, but i think those waits are needed for proper operation on lossy links14:14
apwso there is no way to remove them en-toto14:15
ppisatiapw: it's identical to the same fix in all the others branch14:16
apwok will check into that and let you know thanks14:17
pmatulisapw: it's not a lossy link (between 2 lan servers)14:17
ppisatiapw: anyway, what if axe that from my maverick/ti-omap4 so you can uppload the rest?14:17
apwppisati, leave it with me, if i decide not to take it i'll take the rest without you needing to do anything, i'll reply in email14:18
ppisatiok14:18
apwonce i've reviewed the rest14:18
ogasawaraapw: were you able to get around to disabling the cron for O builds yesterday?  just want to make sure before I push the bits I have.14:23
apwi just had a look and actually we don't do pre-proposed for O yet, as there are no O PPAs yet14:24
apwogasawara, ^^14:24
apwso you are safe14:24
ogasawaraapw: cool.  I'm just gonna twiddle the changelog in my startnewrelease commit to version 3.0-0.1 and then push14:25
apwok14:25
apwi'll get the bits to make it work on the top pronto14:25
apwogasawara, did you do the abi as well ?14:34
ogasawaraapw: yep14:34
ogasawaraapw: I almost forgot14:34
apwi made that mistake the first time :(14:34
ogasawaraapw: should be pushed now14:34
apwppisati, ok all pushed ... thanks :)14:46
apwppisati, i did have to fix a couple of commit texts on the first one, so you may find its a rebase for you to continue14:47
ppisatiok14:47
ppisatifrom now, i'm slightly modifying the commit i cherry pick14:47
ppisatii'm adding the CVE $id in the commit line14:48
apwits most useful on the s-o-b area, as a CVE-NNN-MMM line14:48
ppisatiso when i do a log --online i can catch the cve <-> commit relationship14:48
apwie on its own line down the bottom, as the tooling finds it14:48
apwsome people do put it on the end of the subject line too , CVE-NNN-MMM14:48
ppisatiso i'll add there too14:49
ppisatiyep, that's what i like14:49
ppisatianyway, i'll put in the subject and bottom commit msg too14:49
apwack sounds fine.  the table is looking much better now14:49
ppisatibtw, yesterday i pushed 2 ti-omap4 tree14:49
ppisatimaverick and natty14:49
apwppisati, i've applied all three of the pushed you sent i beleieve14:49
ppisatidid you review both already?14:49
ppisatiok14:49
apwall reviewed and pushed14:50
apwemail reply in flight14:50
ppisatiooook14:50
* apw is assuming oooook means a long OK14:51
apwrather than the OOOOK (the noise a monkey makes) which often mean something bad has happened14:51
apwppisati, that looks so much better on the matrix :)  excellent14:52
apwkees, will be pleased14:52
* ppisati never heard a monkey acking something :)14:56
apwogasawara, ok my two tiny changes pushed ... see if that builds for you ... note that it will only do so on tangerine14:58
apwogasawara, once i know the version-deps required i will get them added14:58
ogasawaraapw: ack, will kick on off now14:58
apwogasawara, one of those half days of work which lead to 3 lines of change14:58
ogasawaraheh14:59
apwwhen you look at the commits you will see what i mean14:59
ogasawaraapw: I was just thinking about linux-meta now too14:59
apwogasawara, yeah thats going to need some love, you gonna handle that?14:59
ogasawaraapw: not sure yet what changes are required there ...14:59
ogasawaraapw: yep, was gonna start tackling that now14:59
apwi am guessing we just lose a digit14:59
bjfsmb, apw, kees, w.r.t. the security test failure on the latest -proposed, the check for CONFIG_DEBUG_RODATA on the virtual flavour is failing15:36
bjfsmb, apw, kees, it looks like this is not enabled for that flavour on purpose15:36
bjfsmb, apw, kees, I see code in "enforce" that seems to confirm that15:37
bjfsmb, apw, kees, is this truly "by design" or not and a question that maybe only qa can answer is "why have we not hit this issue before"?15:38
keesbjf: right, I'm curious as well. wasn't it enabled in -virtual prior to natty?15:38
sconklinbjf, kees, apw https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux/+bug/77209615:38
ubot2Ubuntu bug 772096 in linux "linux: 2.6.38-9.43 -proposed tracker" [Medium,Fix committed]15:38
sconklinfor reference15:38
bjfsmb, apw, kees, there is the following commit:15:39
bjf    UBUNTU: Temporarily disable RODATA for virtual i38615:39
bjf    15:39
bjf    Setting to RO was ok, but the whole patchset seems to cause15:39
bjf    i386 EC instances to panic on boot when setting the kernel data15:39
bjf    to read-only and no-execute. So while there is no proper fix15:39
bjf    found disable this in the i386 virtual flavour.15:39
bjf    15:39
* kees notes the "temporarily" bit. :)15:39
bjfyes15:40
keesafaik, upstream fixed all those problems a while ago while the CONFIG_DEBUG_SET_MODULE_RONX patchset was shaking out15:40
keesbjf: so, I would say it's not a regression from release, but it's a regression from maverick and should get fixed (without blocking SRU)15:43
bjfhggdh, ^ can you comment on why we had not picked up this issue before?15:43
keesbjf: afaik, qa does not test devel kernels.15:43
bjfkees, we had been told at different times that qa resources were unavailable for sru testing because they were focused on devel15:44
* sconklin facepalms15:44
hggdhI am getting very confused15:45
keesbjf: haha, yeah, good point. :)15:45
bjfhggdh, how can i clear up your confusion?15:45
bjfhggdh, or add to it?15:45
hggdhbjf, we have been running the QRT tests since the beginning; this specific test (test-kernel-security) has run since then. 15:46
hggdhbjf, heh15:46
hggdhall the results are saved, together with the logs15:46
bjfhggdh, why are we only seeing the failure now15:46
bjfogasawara, ^ you probably want to see this15:47
hggdhbjf, right now, without looking at the past logs I cannot comment15:47
bjfhggdh, ok, well, we know why it is failing, would be good to know how we missed it for so long15:48
hggdhbjf, kees, on the 'testing devel kernels': I think we should do it, and not restrict kernel testing to SRU15:48
sconklinnext question - is this worth holding up the natty update that's in process now? We're already tossing the one that's in proposed, so I'd like to keep moving forward with the replacement for it.15:48
bjfhggdh, that statement implies that we do not test devel kernels, is that true?15:48
bjfsconklin, seems like this has been an issue for a while, i'd say don't hold it up15:49
keessconklin: I do not think this should hold up this natty update.15:49
keessconklin: from earlier:15:49
kees14:43 < kees> bjf: so, I would say it's not a regression from release, but it's a regression from maverick and should get fixed (without blocking SRU)15:49
hggdhbjf, the above statement means we -- QA -- never ran the kernel tests we have for SRU on the devel kernels15:49
sconklinack thanks15:49
bjfhggdh, good to know, thanks15:50
sconklindouble facepalm15:50
* sconklin weeps15:50
hggdhsconklin, a question -- the fix to disable RODATA on i386 is one of the fixes for maverick kernel that failed?15:53
sconklinIf you mean are we respinning this kernel anyway for another cycle, the answer is yes. But - we've already done most of the prep and would have to toss some work to go back and incorporate the fix15:54
hggdhsconklin, no, the point is this fix was _introduced_ on this kernel spin, am I correct?15:55
sconklinNo, I don't think so.15:55
sconklinone sec while brad finds it ;)15:56
pgranerbjf, sconklin, while qa was focusing on devel testing it was not kernel... qa has never tested dev kernels, now that will be changing in the future.15:56
ogasawaraapw: amd64 test build (all flavours) passes on tangerine15:59
* ogasawara has to bail for dentist, back in a bit15:59
hggdhsconklin, bjf: at least at 2.6.35-27.48 CONFIG_RODATA was still enabled15:59
apwogasawara, nice thanks15:59
* ppisati is the arm meeting - back in a bit15:59
bjfsconklin, this change came in  2.6.38.0 16:00
bjfhggdh, ^16:00
bjfsconklin, hggdh, i misread git, that should be 2.6.38.1.2716:01
hggdhbjf, only on the 2.6.38 kernel?16:04
bjfhggdh, well, that means that it came in during the natty dev cycle when we picked up the .38 kernel16:05
hggdhbjf, OK, this is why we never saw it 16:05
hggdhbjf, and this is another reason why the QRT tests must be kept up-to-date16:05
hggdhthe QRT cannot be looked as usual QA tests, they must try to keep up-to-date16:06
bjfhggdh, i still disagree with you and this is not a case of needing to stay up-to-date16:14
bjfhggdh, this is a perfect case of everyone not being on the same page w.r.t. knowing what kernel tests are actually run during development16:15
hggdhbjf, OK. I will not get back to this16:16
ppisatithe usb regression we had in oneiric, was it strictly usb3 related or did it screw usb in general?16:35
ppisatiuhm xhci only seems...16:36
hertonppisati: yep, only xhci/usb316:37
ppisatiit seems we lost usb on omap3 with 2.6.39...16:50
hertonppisati: ah sorry, on natty we had a report xhci/usb3 regression on latest stable, on oneiric dunno16:52
* ppisati is trying it out... now...16:53
lamontsconklin: you'll be happy to know that the non-pae kernel is just as broken17:00
sconklinlamont: I;m not sure happy is the operative word17:00
lamontconsistency.  for my next trick, I'll fetch your test kernels17:01
* lamont reboots his router again17:01
lamontwell, in a couple minutes17:01
sconklinlamont: based on the results from those two I hope we can bisect this within about 4 tries17:01
lamontnice17:02
sconklinif they both pass or both fail, it's going to take longer17:02
lamontheh17:04
* ppisati -> out for a walk...17:26
sconklinsmb: still here?20:46
=== yofel_ is now known as yofel
ppisatisconklin: IIRC he was off today (and tomorrow)21:05
sconklinppisati: ok, thanks!21:06
=== Sarvatt_ is now known as Sarvatt

Generated by irclog2html.py 2.7 by Marius Gedminas - find it at mg.pov.lt!