linux-kernel - Re: [GIT PULL] x86 fixes

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: <20251213234821.GAaT37RWQ2AS8guOiT@renoirsky.local>
Date: Sun, 14 Dec 2025 00:48:21 +0100
From: Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	the arch/x86 maintainers <x86@...nel.org>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] x86 fixes

On Sat, Dec 13, 2025 at 11:00:11AM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> Yeah, but that's not really how we apply -stable tags. If it's good for
> -stable, it's good for Linus's tree, full stop.

Full stop, schmulstop... I'm not going to send a not as much as possibly
tested fix to Linus for something which was a nasty pain to get right
a couple of times because of a bunch of SNAFUs by BIOS and Qemu and
whatnot, just to break other machines and then hurry and scramble to fix
it again.

Rather, I'd let it cook for a whole cycle so that we're sure.

The stable tag is correct because it'll get picked up by stable later.
But no worries, I'll mop up after you again as I always do.

> The last I saw from this patch was that you wrote this a month ago:
> 
>   https://lore.kernel.org/r/20251114165358.GCaRdepiZOYK9DlcSc@fat_crate.local

Go up thread.

-- 
Regards/Gruss,
    Boris.

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