[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20200425104110.3bx5xb57fssdvd4y@treble>
Date: Sat, 25 Apr 2020 05:41:10 -0500
From: Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...hat.com>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
Cc: x86@...nel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Vince Weaver <vincent.weaver@...ne.edu>,
Dave Jones <dsj@...com>, Jann Horn <jannh@...gle.com>,
Miroslav Benes <mbenes@...e.cz>,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 00/11] ORC fixes
On Sat, Apr 25, 2020 at 12:25:12PM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
> * Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...hat.com> wrote:
>
> > v2:
> > - Dropped three patches which technically weren't fixes. Will post them
> > later as part of another patch set with more improvements.
> > - Removed show_iret_regs() declaration [mbenes]
> > - Added Miroslav Reviewed-by, Linus Reported-by
> >
> > v1 was here:
> > https://lkml.kernel.org/r/cover.1584033751.git.jpoimboe@redhat.com
> >
> > Jann Horn (1):
> > x86/entry/64: Fix unwind hints in rewind_stack_do_exit()
> >
> > Josh Poimboeuf (9):
> > objtool: Fix stack offset tracking for indirect CFAs
> > x86/entry/64: Fix unwind hints in register clearing code
> > x86/entry/64: Fix unwind hints in kernel exit path
> > x86/entry/64: Fix unwind hints in __switch_to_asm()
> > x86/unwind/orc: Convert global variables to static
> > x86/unwind: Prevent false warnings for non-current tasks
> > x86/unwind/orc: Prevent unwinding before ORC initialization
> > x86/unwind/orc: Fix error path for bad ORC entry type
> > x86/unwind/orc: Fix premature unwind stoppage due to IRET frames
> >
> > Miroslav Benes (1):
> > x86/unwind/orc: Don't skip the first frame for inactive tasks
>
> Thanks for doing this. These ORC handling bugs IMHO look serious and
> widespread enough to warrant x86/urgent treatment, and the v2 series is
> fixes-only.
>
> Any objections against targeting v5.7-rc3 with this, assuming that
> there's no problems found during review and it passes about a week of
> testing?
Hi Ingo,
Due to other distractions, I unfortunately have been sitting on some of
these fixes for several months -- notice some of the long Reported-by
chains :-/
They're good small localized fixes and I would agree it makes sense to
target x86/urgent.
Thanks!
--
Josh
Powered by blists - more mailing lists