linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 5.10 066/142] KVM: Documentation: Fix spec for KVM_CAP_ENABLE_CAP

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: <20210203010506.GU4035784@sasha-vm>
Date:   Tue, 2 Feb 2021 20:05:06 -0500
From:   Sasha Levin <sashal@...nel.org>
To:     Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, stable@...r.kernel.org,
        Quentin Perret <qperret@...gle.com>,
        Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5.10 066/142] KVM: Documentation: Fix spec for
 KVM_CAP_ENABLE_CAP_VM

On Tue, Feb 02, 2021 at 02:37:09PM +0100, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
>From: Quentin Perret <qperret@...gle.com>
>
>commit a10f373ad3c760dd40b41e2f69a800ee7b8da15e upstream.
>
>The documentation classifies KVM_ENABLE_CAP with KVM_CAP_ENABLE_CAP_VM
>as a vcpu ioctl, which is incorrect. Fix it by specifying it as a VM
>ioctl.
>
>Fixes: e5d83c74a580 ("kvm: make KVM_CAP_ENABLE_CAP_VM architecture agnostic")
>Signed-off-by: Quentin Perret <qperret@...gle.com>
>Message-Id: <20210108165349.747359-1-qperret@...gle.com>
>Signed-off-by: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>
>Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
>
>---
> Documentation/virt/kvm/api.rst |    2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
>--- a/Documentation/virt/kvm/api.rst
>+++ b/Documentation/virt/kvm/api.rst
>@@ -1319,7 +1319,7 @@ documentation when it pops into existenc
>
> :Capability: KVM_CAP_ENABLE_CAP_VM
> :Architectures: all
>-:Type: vcpu ioctl
>+:Type: vm ioctl
> :Parameters: struct kvm_enable_cap (in)
> :Returns: 0 on success; -1 on error

Um, how did this patch made it in?

-- 
Thanks,
Sasha