linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 4.12 26/84] x86/xen/efi: Initialize only the EFI struct members used by Xen

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]

Message-ID: <20170720094110.sy552pxras33wig5@gmail.com>
Date:   Thu, 20 Jul 2017 11:41:10 +0200
From:   Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
To:     Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
Cc:     Daniel Kiper <daniel.kiper@...cle.com>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, stable@...r.kernel.org,
        Boris Ostrovsky <boris.ostrovsky@...cle.com>,
        Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@...aro.org>,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        andrew.cooper3@...rix.com, jgross@...e.com,
        linux-efi@...r.kernel.org, matt@...eblueprint.co.uk,
        xen-devel@...ts.xenproject.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4.12 26/84] x86/xen/efi: Initialize only the EFI struct
 members used by Xen


* Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org> wrote:

> On Thu, Jul 20, 2017 at 10:39:10AM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > 
> > * Daniel Kiper <daniel.kiper@...cle.com> wrote:
> > 
> > > Hey Greg,
> > > 
> > > On Wed, Jul 19, 2017 at 11:43:32AM +0200, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> > > > 4.12-stable review patch.  If anyone has any objections, please let me know.
> > > 
> > > Why did you skip this patch for 4.11? IMO it should be applied there too.
> > 
> > The thing is, this patch should probaly not even be in v4.12, as it should only 
> > make any difference if there's a separate _bug_ in the kernel.
> > 
> > This patch makes things more robust going forward, but I question that it needs to 
> > be in -stable.
> 
> Yeah, good point, I'm going to go drop it entirely from the 4.12-stable
> tree as it obviously isn't stable material, sorry for not catching that
> before.

I should have caught the tag as well when applying the upstream patch to begin 
with.

Thanks!

	Ingo