linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 4/6] KVM: selftests: Make Hyper-V guest OS ID common

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:   Wed, 9 Nov 2022 20:18:31 +0000
From:   Sean Christopherson <seanjc@...gle.com>
To:     Vipin Sharma <vipinsh@...gle.com>
Cc:     Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@...hat.com>, pbonzini@...hat.com,
        dmatlack@...gle.com, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/6] KVM: selftests: Make Hyper-V guest OS ID common

On Wed, Nov 09, 2022, Vipin Sharma wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 9, 2022 at 5:48 AM Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@...hat.com> wrote:
> >
> > Vipin Sharma <vipinsh@...gle.com> writes:
> >
> > > Make guest OS ID calculation common to all hyperv tests and similar to
> > > hv_generate_guest_id().
> >
> > A similar (but without hv_linux_guest_id()) patch is present in my
> > Hyper-V TLB flush update:
> >
> > https://lore.kernel.org/kvm/20221101145426.251680-32-vkuznets@redhat.com/
> >
> 
> After getting feedback from David, I decided to remove
> LINUX_VERSION_CODE in v2. Our patches are functionally identical now.
> 
> @Sean, Paolo, Vitaly
> Should I be rebasing my v2 on top of TLB flush patch series and remove
> patch 4 and 5 from my series? I am not sure how these situations are
> handled.

In this case, unless Paolo is NOT planning on merging Vitaly's series for 6.2, I
would just wait for Vitaly's series to get pushed to kvm/queue.  I'm banking on
Paolo going on a queueing spree soon ;-)