[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1080098449.2581214.1516898111818.JavaMail.zimbra@redhat.com>
Date: Thu, 25 Jan 2018 11:35:11 -0500 (EST)
From: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>
To: Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
Cc: Liran Alon <liran.alon@...cle.com>,
Alexander Levin <Alexander.Levin@...rosoft.com>,
konrad wilk <konrad.wilk@...cle.com>, stable@...r.kernel.org,
rkrcmar@...hat.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH AUTOSEL for 4.14 006/100] KVM: nVMX/nSVM: Don't
intercept #UD when running L2
> > Just wanted stable maintainers to note that Jim, Paolo & myself decided
> > eventually to revert this commit along with commit ae1f57670703 on
> > upstream KVM. However, it is true that this commit makes commit
> > ae1f57670703 more complete. Therefore we have 2 options here:
> > 1) Apply this backport and sometime in the future also apply the reverts of
> > both these commits with Paolo's commit which reverts them.
>
> Being "bug compatible" is good, I like that option :)
It's not even a bug, just different behavior and in the end it turns out to be
less surprising if we revert. So even better. :)
> When is the revert patch going to hit Linus's tree? During the 4.16-rc1
> merge window?
It's already there, commit ac9b305caa. But since this one was not marked
for stable, ac9b305caa wasn't either.
Paolo
Powered by blists - more mailing lists