Re: backport mseal and mseal_test to 6.10

[Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>]

On Mon, Oct 14, 2024 at 09:19:55AM -0700, Jeff Xu wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 14, 2024 at 9:12 AM Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, Oct 14, 2024 at 08:27:29AM -0700, Jeff Xu wrote:
> > > On Sun, Oct 13, 2024 at 10:54 PM Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On Sun, Oct 13, 2024 at 10:17:48PM -0700, Jeff Xu wrote:
> > > > > Hi Greg,
> > > > >
> > > > > How are you?
> > > > >
> > > > > What is the process to backport Pedro's recent mseal fixes to 6.10 ?
> > > >
> > > > Please read:
> > > >     https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/process/stable-kernel-rules.html
> > > > for how all of this works :)
> > > >
> > > > > Specifically those 5 commits:
> > > > >
> > > > > 67203f3f2a63d429272f0c80451e5fcc469fdb46
> > > > >     selftests/mm: add mseal test for no-discard madvise
> > > > >
> > > > > 4d1b3416659be70a2251b494e85e25978de06519
> > > > >     mm: move can_modify_vma to mm/vma.h
> > > > >
> > > > >  4a2dd02b09160ee43f96c759fafa7b56dfc33816
> > > > >   mm/mprotect: replace can_modify_mm with can_modify_vma
> > > > >
> > > > > 23c57d1fa2b9530e38f7964b4e457fed5a7a0ae8
> > > > >       mseal: replace can_modify_mm_madv with a vma variant
> > > > >
> > > > > f28bdd1b17ec187eaa34845814afaaff99832762
> > > > >    selftests/mm: add more mseal traversal tests
> > > > >
> > > > > There will be merge conflicts, I  can backport them to 5.10 and test
> > > > > to help the backporting process.
> > > >
> > > > 5.10 or 6.10?
> > > >
> > > 6.10.
> > >
> > > > And why 6.10?  If you look at the front page of kernel.org you will see
> > > > that 6.10 is now end-of-life, so why does that kernel matter to you
> > > > anymore?
> > > >
> > > OK, I didn't know that. Less work is nice :-)
> >
> > So, now that you don't care about 6.10.y, what about 6.11.y?  Are any of
> > these actually bugfixes that people need?
> >
> Oh, yes. It would be great to backport those 5 mentioned to 6.11.y.

Why, are they bugfixes?

> I don't know what will be the lifetime of 6.11.y, but keeping mseal's
> semantics consistent across releases is important.

Stable kernels last until the next release happens, like has been
happening for 15+ years now, nothing new here :)

If you wish to have patches backported to stable kernels, please read
    https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/process/stable-kernel-rules.html
for how to do this properly.

thanks,

greg k-h