linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3] x86/cpu: Add INTEL_LUNARLAKE_M to X86_BUG

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: <CAJvTdKmi6-nEwhq8edPw5g2b+ME2_HX+ctePpcPFoZPbNcXqhQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 21 Nov 2024 05:22:00 -0500
From: Len Brown <lenb@...nel.org>
To: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>
Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>, peterz@...radead.org, tglx@...utronix.de, 
	x86@...nel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-pm@...r.kernel.org, 
	Len Brown <len.brown@...el.com>, stable@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] x86/cpu: Add INTEL_LUNARLAKE_M to X86_BUG_MONITOR

On Wed, Nov 20, 2024 at 3:21 PM Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com> wrote:

> I'm not going to lose sleep over it, but as a policy, I think we should
> backport CPU fixes to all the stable kernels. I don't feel like I have a
> good enough handle on what kernels folks run on new systems to make a
> prediction.

FWIW, I sent a backport of a slightly earlier version of this patch,
but all I got back was vitriol about violating the kernel Documentation on
sending to stable.

Maybe a native english speaker could re-write that Documentation,
so that a native english speaker can understand it?
Or better yet, somebody can write a script or update checkpatch so that
developers can more likely avoid the Soup Nazi treatment?

ie. I agree with you, and I'm happy to help, but it isn't clear how.

Len Brown, Intel