From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
To: Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@de.ibm.com>
Cc: jeremy@goop.org,
Raghavendra K T <raghavendra.kt@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
kvm@vger.kernel.org, peterz@infradead.org,
virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org,
paul.gortmaker@windriver.com, hpa@zytor.com, ak@linux.intel.com,
a.ryabinin@samsung.com, x86@kernel.org, mingo@redhat.com,
xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org, paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com,
riel@redhat.com, konrad.wilk@oracle.com, dave@stgolabs.net,
sasha.levin@oracle.com, davej@redhat.com, tglx@linutronix.de,
waiman.long@hp.com, Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
oleg@redhat.com, stable@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, pbonzini@redhat.com,
akpm@linux-foundation.org, torvalds@linux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH for stable] x86/spinlocks/paravirt: Fix memory corruption on unlock
Date: Wed, 25 Feb 2015 11:29:32 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20150225102932.GA554@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <54EDA08E.5080901@de.ibm.com>
* Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@de.ibm.com> wrote:
> > By all means!
> >
> > You'll first need to cherry-pick these commits:
>
> > 927609d622a3 kernel: tighten rules for ACCESS ONCE
> > c5b19946eb76 kernel: Fix sparse warning for ACCESS_ONCE
> > dd36929720f4 kernel: make READ_ONCE() valid on const arguments
>
> If you go before 3.19, you will also need
>
> 230fa253df63 kernel: Provide READ_ONCE and ASSIGN_ONCE
> 43239cbe79fc kernel: Change ASSIGN_ONCE(val, x) to WRITE_ONCE(x, val)
The affected spinlock code went over several iterations
post v3.18, which I think makes the spinlock change too
risky and complex to backport so far back. So it's not
necessay to backport these READ_ONCE() changes.
> > That's the minimum set you will need for backporting,
> > due to overlapping changes to the ACCESS_ONCE()
> > definition.
> >
> > and then apply this commit:
> >
> > d6abfdb20223 x86/spinlocks/paravirt: Fix memory corruption on unlock
>
> the alternative might be to replace READ_ONCE with
> ACCESS_ONCE when doing the backport.
Doing changes to patches when doing a backport is a big
no-no IMHO. Either there is a clean sequence of upstream
commit IDs to cherry-pick, or it should not be backported
in most cases.
Thanks,
Ingo
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
To: Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@de.ibm.com>
Cc: Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
Raghavendra K T <raghavendra.kt@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
tglx@linutronix.de, mingo@redhat.com, hpa@zytor.com,
torvalds@linux-foundation.org, konrad.wilk@oracle.com,
pbonzini@redhat.com, peterz@infradead.org,
paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com, waiman.long@hp.com, davej@redhat.com,
oleg@redhat.com, x86@kernel.org, jeremy@goop.org,
paul.gortmaker@windriver.com, ak@linux.intel.com,
jasowang@redhat.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
kvm@vger.kernel.org, virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org,
xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org, riel@redhat.com,
akpm@linux-foundation.org, a.ryabinin@samsung.com,
sasha.levin@oracle.com, dave@stgolabs.net,
stable@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH for stable] x86/spinlocks/paravirt: Fix memory corruption on unlock
Date: Wed, 25 Feb 2015 11:29:32 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20150225102932.GA554@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <54EDA08E.5080901@de.ibm.com>
* Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@de.ibm.com> wrote:
> > By all means!
> >
> > You'll first need to cherry-pick these commits:
>
> > 927609d622a3 kernel: tighten rules for ACCESS ONCE
> > c5b19946eb76 kernel: Fix sparse warning for ACCESS_ONCE
> > dd36929720f4 kernel: make READ_ONCE() valid on const arguments
>
> If you go before 3.19, you will also need
>
> 230fa253df63 kernel: Provide READ_ONCE and ASSIGN_ONCE
> 43239cbe79fc kernel: Change ASSIGN_ONCE(val, x) to WRITE_ONCE(x, val)
The affected spinlock code went over several iterations
post v3.18, which I think makes the spinlock change too
risky and complex to backport so far back. So it's not
necessay to backport these READ_ONCE() changes.
> > That's the minimum set you will need for backporting,
> > due to overlapping changes to the ACCESS_ONCE()
> > definition.
> >
> > and then apply this commit:
> >
> > d6abfdb20223 x86/spinlocks/paravirt: Fix memory corruption on unlock
>
> the alternative might be to replace READ_ONCE with
> ACCESS_ONCE when doing the backport.
Doing changes to patches when doing a backport is a big
no-no IMHO. Either there is a clean sequence of upstream
commit IDs to cherry-pick, or it should not be backported
in most cases.
Thanks,
Ingo
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-02-25 10:29 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 31+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-02-24 9:24 [PATCH for stable] x86/spinlocks/paravirt: Fix memory corruption on unlock Raghavendra K T
2015-02-24 9:24 ` Raghavendra K T
2015-02-24 9:24 ` Raghavendra K T
2015-02-24 14:17 ` Greg KH
2015-02-24 14:17 ` Greg KH
2015-02-24 14:47 ` Ingo Molnar
2015-02-24 14:47 ` Ingo Molnar
2015-02-24 14:47 ` Ingo Molnar
2015-02-24 15:20 ` Greg KH
2015-02-24 15:20 ` Greg KH
2015-02-24 18:29 ` Raghavendra K T
2015-02-24 18:29 ` Raghavendra K T
2015-02-24 18:29 ` Raghavendra K T
2015-02-24 15:20 ` Greg KH
2015-02-24 18:19 ` Raghavendra K T
2015-02-24 18:19 ` Raghavendra K T
2015-02-24 18:19 ` Raghavendra K T
2015-02-24 18:38 ` Greg KH
2015-02-24 18:38 ` Greg KH
2015-02-25 10:08 ` Ingo Molnar
2015-02-25 10:08 ` Ingo Molnar
2015-02-25 10:14 ` Christian Borntraeger
2015-02-25 10:29 ` Ingo Molnar [this message]
2015-02-25 10:29 ` Ingo Molnar
2015-02-25 10:29 ` Ingo Molnar
2015-02-25 10:14 ` Christian Borntraeger
2015-02-25 10:14 ` Christian Borntraeger
2015-02-25 10:08 ` Ingo Molnar
2015-02-24 18:38 ` Greg KH
2015-02-24 14:17 ` Greg KH
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2015-02-24 9:24 Raghavendra K T
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20150225102932.GA554@gmail.com \
--to=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=a.ryabinin@samsung.com \
--cc=ak@linux.intel.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=borntraeger@de.ibm.com \
--cc=dave@stgolabs.net \
--cc=davej@redhat.com \
--cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=jeremy@goop.org \
--cc=konrad.wilk@oracle.com \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=oleg@redhat.com \
--cc=paul.gortmaker@windriver.com \
--cc=paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=raghavendra.kt@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=riel@redhat.com \
--cc=sasha.levin@oracle.com \
--cc=stable@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org \
--cc=waiman.long@hp.com \
--cc=x86@kernel.org \
--cc=xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.