linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH -fixes 0/2] Fix set_huge_pte

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: <CAHVXubi5C0hBaXx5tqVHZAJSd1zvHRqoxUEkk9ZbmZ5mq2=mAw@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Thu, 26 Oct 2023 10:57:27 +0200
From:   Alexandre Ghiti <alexghiti@...osinc.com>
To:     Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc:     Alexandre Ghiti <alex@...ti.fr>,
        Paul Walmsley <paul.walmsley@...ive.com>,
        Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@...belt.com>,
        Albert Ou <aou@...s.berkeley.edu>,
        Andrew Jones <ajones@...tanamicro.com>,
        Qinglin Pan <panqinglin2020@...as.ac.cn>,
        Ryan Roberts <ryan.roberts@....com>,
        linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        "linux-mm@...ck.org" <linux-mm@...ck.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH -fixes 0/2] Fix set_huge_pte_at()

Hi Andrew,

On Tue, Oct 3, 2023 at 6:04 PM Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org> wrote:
>
> On Tue, 3 Oct 2023 17:43:10 +0200 Alexandre Ghiti <alex@...ti.fr> wrote:
>
> > +cc Andrew: Would  you mind taking this patchset in your tree for the
> > next rc? This patchset depends on a previous fix for arm64 that you
> > merged in rc4 which is not in the riscv -fixes branch yet.
> >
> > I saw with Palmer and he should ack this shortly.
>
> Well I grabbed them into mm.git's mm-hotfixes-unstable queue.  All
> being well I'll move them into mm-hotfixes-stable within a week then
> into Linus shortly after.

Those fixes finally did not make it to 6.6, I was hoping for them to
land in -rc6 or -rc7: for the future, what should have I done to avoid
that?

Thanks,

Alex

>
> Unless something changes.  It's odd that the riscv tree(s) aren't set
> up to merge fixes against -rc4?