linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/4] [PULL REQUEST] iommu/vt-d: Fixes for v6.2-rc8

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]

Message-ID: <88e0b71e-5674-8b03-e038-9ab75503c817@linux.intel.com>
Date:   Thu, 16 Feb 2023 21:45:18 +0800
From:   Baolu Lu <baolu.lu@...ux.intel.com>
To:     Joerg Roedel <joro@...tes.org>
Cc:     baolu.lu@...ux.intel.com,
        Jacob Pan <jacob.jun.pan@...ux.intel.com>,
        Tina Zhang <tina.zhang@...el.com>, iommu@...ts.linux.dev,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/4] [PULL REQUEST] iommu/vt-d: Fixes for v6.2-rc8

On 2023/2/16 21:42, Joerg Roedel wrote:
> Hi Baolu,
> 
> On Thu, Feb 16, 2023 at 09:08:12PM +0800, Lu Baolu wrote:
>> Below iommu/vt-d fixes are queued for your fixes branch.
>>
>> - Two performance optimizations
>> - Fix PASID directory pointer coherency
>> - Fix missed rollbacks in error path
>>
>> Please consider it for the iommu/fixes branch.
> So nothing of this seems really critical (e.g. fixes a regression that a
> number of people are encountering). Especially the performance
> optimizations do not qualify as fixes at this stage of the cycle. I will
> queue them in the VT-d branch so that they go upstream in the next merge
> window, unless you convince me otherwise.

Yes. Nothing really critical. It's fine to put them in the vt-d branch.

Best regards,
baolu