linux-kernel - Re: linux-next: manual merge of the kvm tree with the tip tree

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <Z_ydwZOWA9cXDqXd@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 14 Apr 2025 07:31:45 +0200
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
To: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
Cc: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
	Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@...el.com>,
	Binbin Wu <binbin.wu@...ux.intel.com>, KVM <kvm@...r.kernel.org>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Linux Next Mailing List <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the kvm tree with the tip tree


* Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au> wrote:

> Hi all,
> 
> Today's linux-next merge of the kvm tree got a conflict in:
> 
>   arch/x86/kvm/vmx/vmx.c
> 
> between commits:
> 
>   c435e608cf59 ("x86/msr: Rename 'rdmsrl()' to 'rdmsrq()'")
>   78255eb23973 ("x86/msr: Rename 'wrmsrl()' to 'wrmsrq()'")
> 
> from the tip tree and commit:
> 
>   7172c753c26a ("KVM: VMX: Move common fields of struct vcpu_{vmx,tdx} to a struct")
> 
> from the kvm tree.
> 
> I fixed it up (see below) and can carry the fix as necessary. This
> is now fixed as far as linux-next is concerned, but any non trivial
> conflicts should be mentioned to your upstream maintainer when your tree
> is submitted for merging.  You may also want to consider cooperating
> with the maintainer of the conflicting tree to minimise any particularly
> complex conflicts.

>  -	wrmsrl(MSR_KERNEL_GS_BASE, vmx->msr_guest_kernel_gs_base);
>  +	wrmsrq(MSR_KERNEL_GS_BASE, vmx->msr_guest_kernel_gs_base);

>  -	wrmsrl(MSR_KERNEL_GS_BASE, vmx->vt.msr_host_kernel_gs_base);
> ++	wrmsrq(MSR_KERNEL_GS_BASE, vmx->vt.msr_host_kernel_gs_base);

>  -		rdmsrl(MSR_KERNEL_GS_BASE, vmx->msr_guest_kernel_gs_base);
>  +		rdmsrq(MSR_KERNEL_GS_BASE, vmx->msr_guest_kernel_gs_base);

>  -		wrmsrl(MSR_KERNEL_GS_BASE, data);
>  +		wrmsrq(MSR_KERNEL_GS_BASE, data);

Looks good, thanks!

	Ingo