linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3] KVM: x86: Fix lapic timer interrupt lost after loading a snapshot.

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, 29 Sep 2023 16:51:06 -0700
From:   Haitao Shan <hshan@...gle.com>
To:     Sean Christopherson <seanjc@...gle.com>
Cc:     Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
        Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>, x86@...nel.org,
        "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] KVM: x86: Fix lapic timer interrupt lost after loading
 a snapshot.

I understand now. Thanks!

On Fri, Sep 29, 2023 at 10:11 AM Sean Christopherson <seanjc@...gle.com> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Sep 29, 2023, Haitao Shan wrote:
> > Thank you very much.
> >
> > I do have one more question. Is this fix going to be backported to
> > v6.3, v6.4, etc? Or perhaps that will be a decision made by other
> > maintainers? The reason for such a question is to decide whether we
> > have to keep the workaround for certain kernel versions.
>
> It's tagged for stable, so it'll get automatically selected/backported for stable
> kernels so long as the patch applies cleanly.  That won't include 6.3 or 6.4
> because those are already end-of-life, i.e. not LTS kernels, and not the most
> recent release.
>
> If the patch doesn't apply cleanly, e.g. I highly doubt it'll apply as-is for 5.15,
> then someone has to do a manual backport, where "someone" can be anyone.  Sometimes
> that's a maintainer, but just as often it's someone that really cares about fixing
> something in a particular kernel.



-- 
Haitao @Google