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: <alpine.DEB.2.21.1809291954310.1432@nanos.tec.linutronix.de>
Date:   Sat, 29 Sep 2018 19:56:28 +0200 (CEST)
From:   Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
To:     Reinette Chatre <reinette.chatre@...el.com>
cc:     Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>, fenghua.yu@...el.com,
        tony.luck@...el.com, mingo@...hat.com, acme@...nel.org,
        gavin.hindman@...el.com, jithu.joseph@...el.com,
        dave.hansen@...el.com, hpa@...or.com, x86@...nel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH V5 0/6] perf and x86/intel_rdt: Fix lack of coordination
 with perf

Reinette,

On Sat, 29 Sep 2018, Reinette Chatre wrote:
> I interpreted Thomas and Peter's responses to mean that there are no
> objections for this to be included in v4.19 as a fix.
> 
> If I understand the tip branches correctly the core patch seems to be
> headed to v4.19 while the rest (excluding the final patch
> "x86/intel_rdt: Re-enable pseudo-lock measurements") are headed to v4.20.
> 
> Have you decided against including this into v4.19 or did I
> misunderstand the responses and/or branches?

I did not decide anything yet. It's not going into -rc6 as it's not yet
through next and the other standard testing.

I'm also looking at the other set of RDT fixes, which obviously want to go
as well. So not sure how to deal with all of that.

Thanks,

	tglx

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ