linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 5/7] x86/mm, tracing: Fix CR2 corruption

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: <20190710162709.1c306f8a@gandalf.local.home>
Date:   Wed, 10 Jul 2019 16:27:09 -0400
From:   Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
To:     Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc:     Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
        "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
        Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
        Juergen Gross <jgross@...e.com>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        He Zhe <zhe.he@...driver.com>,
        Joel Fernandes <joel@...lfernandes.org>, devel@...ukata.com,
        stable <stable@...r.kernel.org>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Sasha Levin <sashal@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 5/7] x86/mm, tracing: Fix CR2 corruption


[ added stable folks ]

On Sun, 7 Jul 2019 11:17:09 -0700
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org> wrote:

> On Sun, Jul 7, 2019 at 8:11 AM Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org> wrote:
> >
> > FWIW, I'm leaning toward suggesting that we apply the trivial tracing
> > fix and backport *that*.  Then, in -tip, we could revert it and apply
> > this patch instead.  
> 
> You don't have to have the same fix in stable as in -tip.
> 
> It's fine to send something to stable that says "Fixed differently by
> commit XYZ upstream". The main thing is to make sure that stable
> doesn't have fixes that then get lost upstream (which we used to have
> long long ago).
> 

But isn't it easier for them to just pull the quick fix in, if it is in
your tree? That is, it shouldn't be too hard to make the "quick fix"
that gets backported on your tree (and probably better testing), and
then add the proper fix on top of it. The stable folks will then just
use the commit sha to know what to take, and feel more confident about
taking it.

-- Steve