linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 0/6] Introduce CET supervisor state support

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: <adcd4fb5-052a-4d75-b1f9-1168d153338a@zytor.com>
Date: Mon, 10 Feb 2025 18:09:37 -0800
From: Xin Li <xin@...or.com>
To: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@...gle.com>, Chao Gao <chao.gao@...el.com>,
        Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
Cc: tglx@...utronix.de, dave.hansen@...el.com, x86@...nel.org,
        pbonzini@...hat.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
        peterz@...radead.org, rick.p.edgecombe@...el.com, mlevitsk@...hat.com,
        weijiang.yang@...el.com, john.allen@....com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/6] Introduce CET supervisor state support

On 1/10/2025 5:26 PM, Sean Christopherson wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 26, 2024, Chao Gao wrote:
>> On Tue, Nov 26, 2024 at 06:17:04PM +0800, Chao Gao wrote:
>>> This v2 is essentially a resend of the v1 series. I took over this work
>> >from Weijiang, so I added my Signed-off-by and incremented the version
>>> number. This repost is to seek more feedback on this work, which is a
>>> dependency for CET KVM support. In turn, CET KVM support is a dependency
>>> for both FRED KVM support and CET AMD support.
>>
>> This series is primarily for the CET KVM series. Merging it through the tip
>> tree means this code will not have an actual user until the CET KVM series
>> is merged. A good proposal from Rick is that x86 maintainers can ack this
>> series, and then it can be picked up by the KVM maintainers along with the
>> CET KVM series. Dave, Paolo and Sean, are you okay with this approach?
> 
> Boris indicated off-list that he would prefer to take this through tip and give
> KVM an immutable branch.  I'm a-ok with either approach.
> 

So is the plan to merge this patch set in the v6.14 cycle?

Thanks!
     Xin