From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: greg@kroah.com (Greg KH) Date: Tue, 13 Mar 2018 11:04:42 +0100 Subject: [PATCH 0/29] arm meltdown fix backporting review for lts 4.9 In-Reply-To: References: <1519790211-16582-1-git-send-email-alex.shi@linaro.org> <20180301152450.GA4061@kroah.com> <5cf40379-9098-da02-a471-8abd7d8f0be8@linaro.org> <20180302165415.GB8704@kroah.com> Message-ID: <20180313100442.GB1999@kroah.com> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On Wed, Mar 07, 2018 at 06:24:09PM +0000, Ard Biesheuvel wrote: > On 2 March 2018 at 16:54, Greg KH wrote: > > On Fri, Mar 02, 2018 at 05:14:50PM +0800, Alex Shi wrote: > >> > >> > >> On 03/01/2018 11:24 PM, Greg KH wrote: > >> > On Wed, Feb 28, 2018 at 11:56:22AM +0800, Alex Shi wrote: > >> >> Hi All, > >> >> > >> >> This backport patchset fixed the meltdown issue, it's original branch: > >> >> https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/arm64/linux.git/log/?h=kpti > >> >> A few dependency or fixingpatches are also picked up, if they are necessary > >> >> and no functional changes. > >> >> > >> >> The patchset also on repository: > >> >> git://git.linaro.org/kernel/linux-linaro-stable.git lts-4.9-spectrevv2 > >> >> > >> >> No bug found yet from kernelci.org and lkft testing. > >> > > >> > No bugs is good, but does it actually fix the meltdown problem? What > >> > did you test it on? > >> > >> Oh, I have no A73/A75 cpu, so I can not reproduce meltdown bug. > > > > Then why should I trust this backport at all? > > > > Please test on the hardware that is affected, otherwise you do not know > > if your patches do anything or not. > > > > I don't think it is feasible to test these backports by confirming > that they make the fundamental issue go away. We simply don't have the > code to reproduce all the variants, and we have to rely on the > information provided by ARM Ltd. regarding which cores are affected > and which aren't. You really don't have the reproducers? Please work with ARM to resolve that, this should not be a non-tested set of patches. That's really worse than no patches at all, as if they were applied, that would provide a false-sense of "all is fixed". thanks, greg k-h From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Cyrus-Session-Id: sloti22d1t05-2795102-1520935483-2-9225350245094118324 X-Sieve: CMU Sieve 3.0 X-Spam-known-sender: yes ("Address greg@kroah.com in From header is in addressbook"); in-addressbook; shared/fdfaecbe-d8f0-4518-a17e-0d89bf6dc529 ("Greg") X-Spam-score: 0.0 X-Spam-hits: BAYES_00 -1.9, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS 0.25, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI -5, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD -0.01, LANGUAGES en, BAYES_USED global, SA_VERSION 3.4.0 X-Spam-source: IP='209.132.180.67', Host='vger.kernel.org', Country='CN', FromHeader='com', MailFrom='org' X-Spam-charsets: plain='us-ascii' X-Resolved-to: greg@kroah.com X-Delivered-to: greg@kroah.com X-Mail-from: stable-owner@vger.kernel.org ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; cv=none; d=messagingengine.com; s=arctest; t=1520935482; b=aSQ0URY33tQiCQzwhVnlBxbq408FlWgN+16Us+1hk/Iw7Yk 73Gcq41tKJlhKdBs3nSGTimulSCKgJRvn6jfnoWe/cPYH0C1rf36XSu9qNZiu7me p8tML3EJe7eCdc+LIhA4iEeGZml4EEdVvTb/uErDDF0yQH2D09eHOAAGKoSWxK3r ztaQLQ2KHEmKYZ9WlzzhetgXld/WXvirrvCr8W9OGEZrSfTv940H/Pm3STRcm1Y4 vne/OOMH8/jci2UEkAUo2b2T1LUchM26MEzY0FF+C1kYXDHeCYh7bMZ8cT56j6FR dEStNwszKCHHJsTgyeg/H6Qmeff+MzWp/z7kcyg== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id :references:mime-version:content-type:in-reply-to:sender :list-id; s=arctest; t=1520935482; bh=mnlBd+VcBVT3Duuu8tlWj0leam RyYssq/cOtdbrZxrE=; b=Qm4QV4VIgjT7UwDVHSl0si5TA+7NbNbHRNnEbJfls1 z7ajdBzOA6J6ZABKjzW98clwnMvxl8ZTkMBGwGMk+50I5JcQGLDdGXHS3jUTVTqS YsGCiREzxXY/5QVi4stx1VzL2i2wswWZmr3CXgnuun1gTI42t7/BjPZbNh+L27+C hi9b8S83GIbCUcnyg3rlRFLYiFjl4Oj5Khmbd5HHkxA+8dapL4OHMl6cWj9IoyPI DzyGlQI8B8LTMYTj7jVrsfD9WedZVhQhaJaDtuoBYJOlpqK1/JtxvBhcaZi/lgiL 9Jo9O4/HTAEDNs7XEujUrsbGY0EA779FId7NQB8OmD3w== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx2.messagingengine.com; arc=none (no signatures found); dkim=pass (2048-bit rsa key sha256) header.d=messagingengine.com header.i=@messagingengine.com header.b=DMYIvCN+ x-bits=2048 x-keytype=rsa x-algorithm=sha256 x-selector=fm2; dmarc=none (p=none,has-list-id=yes,d=none) header.from=kroah.com; iprev=pass policy.iprev=209.132.180.67 (vger.kernel.org); spf=none smtp.mailfrom=stable-owner@vger.kernel.org smtp.helo=vger.kernel.org; x-aligned-from=fail; x-category=clean score=-100 state=0; x-ptr=pass x-ptr-helo=vger.kernel.org x-ptr-lookup=vger.kernel.org; x-return-mx=pass smtp.domain=vger.kernel.org smtp.result=pass smtp_org.domain=kernel.org smtp_org.result=pass smtp_is_org_domain=no header.domain=kroah.com header.result=pass header_is_org_domain=yes Authentication-Results: mx2.messagingengine.com; arc=none (no signatures found); dkim=pass (2048-bit rsa key sha256) header.d=messagingengine.com header.i=@messagingengine.com header.b=DMYIvCN+ x-bits=2048 x-keytype=rsa x-algorithm=sha256 x-selector=fm2; dmarc=none (p=none,has-list-id=yes,d=none) header.from=kroah.com; iprev=pass policy.iprev=209.132.180.67 (vger.kernel.org); spf=none smtp.mailfrom=stable-owner@vger.kernel.org smtp.helo=vger.kernel.org; x-aligned-from=fail; x-category=clean score=-100 state=0; x-ptr=pass x-ptr-helo=vger.kernel.org x-ptr-lookup=vger.kernel.org; x-return-mx=pass smtp.domain=vger.kernel.org smtp.result=pass smtp_org.domain=kernel.org smtp_org.result=pass smtp_is_org_domain=no header.domain=kroah.com header.result=pass header_is_org_domain=yes Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752393AbeCMKEl (ORCPT ); Tue, 13 Mar 2018 06:04:41 -0400 Received: from out1-smtp.messagingengine.com ([66.111.4.25]:47921 "EHLO out1-smtp.messagingengine.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752181AbeCMKEk (ORCPT ); Tue, 13 Mar 2018 06:04:40 -0400 X-ME-Sender: Date: Tue, 13 Mar 2018 11:04:42 +0100 From: Greg KH To: Ard Biesheuvel Cc: Alex Shi , Marc Zyngier , Will Deacon , Catalin Marinas , stable@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel , Linux Kernel Mailing List Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/29] arm meltdown fix backporting review for lts 4.9 Message-ID: <20180313100442.GB1999@kroah.com> References: <1519790211-16582-1-git-send-email-alex.shi@linaro.org> <20180301152450.GA4061@kroah.com> <5cf40379-9098-da02-a471-8abd7d8f0be8@linaro.org> <20180302165415.GB8704@kroah.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.4 (2018-02-28) Sender: stable-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: stable@vger.kernel.org X-getmail-retrieved-from-mailbox: INBOX X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Wed, Mar 07, 2018 at 06:24:09PM +0000, Ard Biesheuvel wrote: > On 2 March 2018 at 16:54, Greg KH wrote: > > On Fri, Mar 02, 2018 at 05:14:50PM +0800, Alex Shi wrote: > >> > >> > >> On 03/01/2018 11:24 PM, Greg KH wrote: > >> > On Wed, Feb 28, 2018 at 11:56:22AM +0800, Alex Shi wrote: > >> >> Hi All, > >> >> > >> >> This backport patchset fixed the meltdown issue, it's original branch: > >> >> https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/arm64/linux.git/log/?h=kpti > >> >> A few dependency or fixingpatches are also picked up, if they are necessary > >> >> and no functional changes. > >> >> > >> >> The patchset also on repository: > >> >> git://git.linaro.org/kernel/linux-linaro-stable.git lts-4.9-spectrevv2 > >> >> > >> >> No bug found yet from kernelci.org and lkft testing. > >> > > >> > No bugs is good, but does it actually fix the meltdown problem? What > >> > did you test it on? > >> > >> Oh, I have no A73/A75 cpu, so I can not reproduce meltdown bug. > > > > Then why should I trust this backport at all? > > > > Please test on the hardware that is affected, otherwise you do not know > > if your patches do anything or not. > > > > I don't think it is feasible to test these backports by confirming > that they make the fundamental issue go away. We simply don't have the > code to reproduce all the variants, and we have to rely on the > information provided by ARM Ltd. regarding which cores are affected > and which aren't. You really don't have the reproducers? Please work with ARM to resolve that, this should not be a non-tested set of patches. That's really worse than no patches at all, as if they were applied, that would provide a false-sense of "all is fixed". thanks, greg k-h