linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 5.10 096/126] KVM: x86/mmu: Use atomic ops to set SPTEs in TDP MMU map

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: <YGy6EVb+JeNu7EOs@sashalap>
Date:   Tue, 6 Apr 2021 15:44:17 -0400
From:   Sasha Levin <sashal@...nel.org>
To:     Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>
Cc:     Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, stable@...r.kernel.org,
        Peter Feiner <pfeiner@...gle.com>,
        Ben Gardon <bgardon@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5.10 096/126] KVM: x86/mmu: Use atomic ops to set SPTEs
 in TDP MMU map

On Tue, Apr 06, 2021 at 08:28:27PM +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>If a patch doesn't (more or less trivially) apply, the maintainer 
>should take action.  Distro maintainers can also jump in and post the 
>backport to subsystem mailing lists.  If the stable kernel loses a 
>patch because a maintainer doesn't have the time to do a backport, 
>it's not the end of the world.

This quickly went from a "world class" to "fuck it".

It's understandable that maintainers don't have all the time in the
world for this, but are you really asking not to backport fixes to
stable trees because you don't have the time for it and don't want
anyone else to do it instead?

Maybe consider designating someone who knows the subsystem well and does
have time for this?

-- 
Thanks,
Sasha