linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 5.4 12/47] KVM: x86: avoid incorrect writes to host MSR_IA32_SPEC

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]

Date:   Fri, 26 Feb 2021 15:18:44 +0100
From:   Thomas Lamprecht <t.lamprecht@...xmox.com>
To:     Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, stable@...r.kernel.org,
        Jim Mattson <jmattson@...hat.com>,
        Sasha Levin <sashal@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5.4 12/47] KVM: x86: avoid incorrect writes to host
 MSR_IA32_SPEC_CTRL

On 26.02.21 15:15, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> On 26/02/21 13:59, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
>>>> So can you please add this patch to the stable trees that backported the
>>>> problematic upstream commit 6441fa6178f5456d1d4b512c08798888f99db185 ?
>>>>
>>>> If I should submit this in any other way just ask, was not sure about
>>>> what works best with a patch which cannot be cherry-picked cleanly.
>>>
>>> Ok, I'll submit it.
>>>
>>> Thanks for the testing.
>>
>> Does that mean I should not take the patch here in this email and that
>> you will submit it after some timeperiod, or that I should take this
>> patch as-is?
> 
> The patch that Thomas requested (commit 841c2be09fe) does not apply cleanly, so I'll take care of sending the backport.
> 

Note that the patch I added inline in my initial mail here was already
adapted to apply cleanly, at least on stable-5.4.y

May not have made that clear enough, so mentioning it here - ignore me this
message if that was read and thought of.

cheers,
Thomas