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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Fri, 26 Feb 2021 15:21:11 +0100
From:   Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>
To:     Thomas Lamprecht <t.lamprecht@...xmox.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 15:18, Thomas Lamprecht wrote:
>>> 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.

No, I just didn't notice at all that you had taken care of backporting 
the patch.  My brain processed it as the quote of the broken patch you 
were replying to...  I wear glasses after all.

Paolo