linux-kernel - Re: [PATCHv10 04/18] cpu/hotplug, x86/acpi: Disable CPU offlining for ACPI MADT wakeup

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: <20240424135052.GDZikOPIOeGxtQRBBc@fat_crate.local>
Date: Wed, 24 Apr 2024 15:50:52 +0200
From: Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
To: "Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
	Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>, x86@...nel.org,
	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
	Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@...el.com>,
	Kuppuswamy Sathyanarayanan <sathyanarayanan.kuppuswamy@...ux.intel.com>,
	Elena Reshetova <elena.reshetova@...el.com>,
	Jun Nakajima <jun.nakajima@...el.com>,
	Rick Edgecombe <rick.p.edgecombe@...el.com>,
	Tom Lendacky <thomas.lendacky@....com>,
	"Kalra, Ashish" <ashish.kalra@....com>,
	Sean Christopherson <seanjc@...gle.com>,
	"Huang, Kai" <kai.huang@...el.com>, Baoquan He <bhe@...hat.com>,
	kexec@...ts.infradead.org, linux-coco@...ts.linux.dev,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Tao Liu <ltao@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCHv10 04/18] cpu/hotplug, x86/acpi: Disable CPU offlining
 for ACPI MADT wakeup

On Wed, Apr 24, 2024 at 11:38:42AM +0300, Kirill A. Shutemov wrote:
> It was wrong from beginning. If ACPI MADT wake up method is used on the
> platform, we cannot handle offline, regardless if it is TDX or not.

Sounds to me like this fact should be a prominent part of the commit
message and these 1-4 patches should be carved out as a separate set
fixing that ACPI MADT thing and I should take them separately now...?

Also, does this need to go to stable although it is kinda big for
stable. If stable, do we need a smaller fix first which is backportable?

Thx.

-- 
Regards/Gruss,
    Boris.

https://people.kernel.org/tglx/notes-about-netiquette