Re: [PATHC] 3.6 spinlock fix

[Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>]

On Fri, 15 Feb 2013, Tim Sander wrote:
> > On Thu, Feb 14, 2013 at 5:35 PM, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> wrote:
> > > On Thu, 14 Feb 2013, Tim Sander wrote:
> > >> > That's true, but w/o seing the OOM output I can't tell what's
> > >> > exhausting the memory.
> > >> 
> > >> When fuzzing the serial port one probably should switch of sysreq. It
> > >> seems
> > >> as if there is a break send somehow and then it selects the OOM option.
> > >> So when switching of MAGIC_SYSRQ the OOMs are gone. So its a non issue.
> > > 
> > > Amazing that you get the break+oom combo out of that fuzzer!
> That fuzzer is running at 57600Hz while the serial port of the fuzzed device is
> running twice that rate. The break condition seems to be easy hit by the fuzzer
>  i've sent in a previous mail. 
> > Doing a basic "git whatchanged" and searching for "trinity" is rather
> > impressive, regardless of the kernel version and/or where "rogue states"
> > may currently be at with their "program"....   Kudos to davej for that.
> Mh, but thats not trinity! Havn't tried that but well fuzzing at a different 
> serial rate than the receiver might be a good idea even if it sounds pretty stupid.
> 
> Attached is the patch for the 3.6.9-rt kernel (but i think this should also apply 
> to the "normal" 3.6 i guess).  But as Greg already took care of this patch i guess 
> that only for convinience. Also it seems as if the patch sent to Greg is missing the
> #include <linux/kdb.h>?

Errm, no. The in_kdb_printk() is an RT specific issue, so I left it
out for the mainline fix.

Thanks,

	tglx