linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH V3 0/8] x86/topology: Improve CPUID.1F handling

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, 14 Oct 2022 10:06:02 +0800
From:   Zhang Rui <rui.zhang@...el.com>
To:     Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>, Len Brown <lenb@...nel.org>
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, x86@...nel.org,
        linux-hwmon@...r.kernel.org, tglx@...utronix.de, mingo@...hat.com,
        bp@...en8.de, dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com, hpa@...or.com,
        peterz@...radead.org, corbet@....net, fenghua.yu@...el.com,
        jdelvare@...e.com, linux@...ck-us.net, len.brown@...el.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH V3 0/8] x86/topology: Improve CPUID.1F handling

Hi, Dave,

On Thu, 2022-10-13 at 08:56 -0700, Dave Hansen wrote:
> On 10/13/22 03:58, Len Brown wrote:
> > This series of BUG FIXES needs to be marked for -stable.
> 
> Hi Len,
> 
> That would have been great feedback to include with your review when
> your provided your acks.  It's also not clear where the bug fixes
> stop
> and the "related fixes" begin.  Is the entire series bug fixes that
> need
> to be marked for -stable?

Patch 4/8 ~ 5/8 are real fixes and they depends on patch 2/8 and 3/8 to
avoid possible regressions. So patch 2/8 ~ 5/8 should be stable
material.

patch 6/8 is also a bugfix, but we have not observed any functionality
issues so far.

thanks,
rui