[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <dc5326fa-955b-44fe-abbd-ab1bf0675529@intel.com>
Date: Mon, 26 Jan 2026 12:36:25 -0800
From: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Ryusuke Konishi <konishi.ryusuke@...il.com>
Cc: Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@...rix.com>, Marco Elver
<elver@...gle.com>, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Alexander Potapenko <glider@...gle.com>, Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@...gle.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>, Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
X86 ML <x86@...nel.org>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
Jann Horn <jannh@...gle.com>, kasan-dev@...glegroups.com,
stable <stable@...r.kernel.org>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [REGRESSION] x86_32 boot hang in 6.19-rc7 caused by b505f1944535
("x86/kfence: avoid writing L1TF-vulnerable PTEs")
On 1/26/26 12:24, Andrew Morton wrote:
> I see that b505f1944535 prevented a Xen warning, but did it have any
> other runtime effects? If not, a prompt revert may be the way to
> proceed for now.
Yeah, that's fine.
At the same time ... KFENCE folks: I wonder if you've been testing on
highmem and/or 32-bit x86 builds or if there's much value to keeping
KFENCE maintained there.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists