linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 3.4 033/176] KVM: s390: flush CPU on load control

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]

Date:	Fri, 10 Apr 2015 09:45:52 +0800
From:	Zefan Li <lizefan@...wei.com>
To:	Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@...ibm.com>
CC:	<lizf@...nel.org>, <stable@...r.kernel.org>,
	<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3.4 033/176] KVM: s390: flush CPU on load control

On 2015/4/9 18:17, Christian Borntraeger wrote:
> Am 09.04.2015 um 10:44 schrieb lizf@...nel.org:
>> From: Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@...ibm.com>
>>
>> 3.4.107-rc1 review patch.  If anyone has any objections, please let me know.
>>
>> ------------------
>>
>>
>> commit 2dca485f8740208604543c3960be31a5dd3ea603 upstream.
> 
> Hmmm, I just realized that this patch only makes a difference with 
> 
> commit d3d692c82e4ed79ae7c85f8825ccfdb7d11819da ("KVM: s390: implement KVM_REQ_TLB_FLUSH and make use of it")
> 
> It should not hurt to have this patch as far as I can tell,
> but it makes no difference. This is also true for other
> stable versions < 3.18 - sorry for noticing it that late.
> 
> commit d3d692c82e4ed79ae7c85f8825ccfdb7d11819da on the other hand
> is not that easy to backport into Linux versions < 3.16.
> 
> So maybe just drop this patch?
> 

I'll drop this one. Thanks for your review!
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/