Kumar Gala writes: > Should this also go to -stable?
It turns out that it's not triggerable (as an oops) from userspace in 2.6.22 and earlier. Commit 1b6610d6 of Ben H's took out #ifdef CONFIG_PPC32 around a couple of CHECK_FULL_REGS calls, which is what made it triggerable on ppc64. We have an interesting difference between ppc32 and ppc64 in our CHECK_FULL_REGS implementation - it's a BUG_ON on 64-bit but just a printk on 32-bit. So on 32-bit someone could use it to spam the logs but not to actually crash the system. So yes, I guess it should go to -stable once Linus takes it, but it's a much less serious vulnerability in 2.6.22 and earlier than I first thought (since it's only 32-bit, and just a user-triggerable printk). And yes we should consolidate the CHECK_FULL_REGS implementations as a WARN_ON with a counter to limit how many we do. Paul. _______________________________________________ Linuxppc-dev mailing list Linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org https://ozlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
