linux-kernel - RE: [PATCH v7 00/13] Intel Processor Trace virtualization enabling

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <82D7661F83C1A047AF7DC287873BF1E167F6DE1A@SHSMSX101.ccr.corp.intel.com>
Date:   Thu, 3 May 2018 11:19:08 +0000
From:   "Kang, Luwei" <luwei.kang@...el.com>
To:     Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
CC:     "kvm@...r.kernel.org" <kvm@...r.kernel.org>,
        "tglx@...utronix.de" <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        "mingo@...hat.com" <mingo@...hat.com>,
        "hpa@...or.com" <hpa@...or.com>, "x86@...nel.org" <x86@...nel.org>,
        "pbonzini@...hat.com" <pbonzini@...hat.com>,
        "rkrcmar@...hat.com" <rkrcmar@...hat.com>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "joro@...tes.org" <joro@...tes.org>,
        "chao.p.peng@...ux.intel.com" <chao.p.peng@...ux.intel.com>,
        "thomas.lendacky@....com" <thomas.lendacky@....com>,
        "bp@...e.de" <bp@...e.de>,
        "brijesh.singh@....com" <brijesh.singh@....com>,
        "Liang, Kan" <kan.liang@...el.com>,
        "Janakarajan.Natarajan@....com" <Janakarajan.Natarajan@....com>,
        "dwmw@...zon.co.uk" <dwmw@...zon.co.uk>,
        "alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com" 
        <alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com>,
        "mathieu.poirier@...aro.org" <mathieu.poirier@...aro.org>,
        "kstewart@...uxfoundation.org" <kstewart@...uxfoundation.org>,
        "gregkh@...uxfoundation.org" <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH v7 00/13] Intel Processor Trace virtualization enabling

> On Thu, May 03, 2018 at 10:23:12AM +0000, Kang, Luwei wrote:
> > Send this patch set twice because path 2 send fail in the first time.
> 
> Then just resend patch 2; also I have two copies of patch 2, so clearly it _did_ send.

Cc all the maintainers and contributors.

Thanks,
Luwei Kang.