linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4 0/7] SRAT/CEDT fixes and updates

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: Thu, 25 Apr 2024 09:34:11 +0200
From: Robert Richter <rrichter@....com>
To: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>
Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>,
	Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
	Alison Schofield <alison.schofield@...el.com>,
	linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-cxl@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 0/7] SRAT/CEDT fixes and updates

On 24.04.24 10:46:44, Dan Williams wrote:
> Robert Richter wrote:
> > Some fixes and updates for SRAT/CEDT parsing code. Patches can be
> > applied individually and are independent.
> > 
> > First patch fixes a page fault during boot. It should be marked
> > stable.
> > 
> > 2nd patch reworks the code around numa_fill_memblks() (Dan's
> > suggestion).
> 
> Just squash these 2 together. The -stable maintainers continue to assert
> that fixes should do the right thing by mainline mainline standards and
> let the -stable backport process decide if a different change needs to
> be made for older kernels. I see no benefit for tracking 2 changes for
> how numa_fill_memblks() is defined.

Ok, will drop #1 in a v5.

Thanks,

-Robert