From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: cdall@linaro.org (Christoffer Dall) Date: Tue, 2 May 2017 19:15:55 +0200 Subject: [PATCH 0/5] KVM/ARM: Fixes for 4.12-rc1 In-Reply-To: References: <20170502133041.10980-1-marc.zyngier@arm.com> <75f031d5-d16e-6311-af44-f2c5af5bded4@redhat.com> Message-ID: <20170502171555.GA12916@cbox> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On Tue, May 02, 2017 at 04:00:49PM +0100, Marc Zyngier wrote: > On 02/05/17 15:44, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > > > > > > On 02/05/2017 15:30, Marc Zyngier wrote: > >> Here's a handful of random fixes I've queued locally that didn't have > >> a chance to make it in 4.11. > >> > >> The first two patches avoid stack-protector messing with the HYP code, > >> as this ends up being a complete disaster. > >> > >> The following two patches fix a bug introduced in the new vgic, where > >> we may queue HW interrupts with the Pending+Active state, which is > >> illegal. > >> > >> The final patch fixes a misinterpretation of the spec, where we > >> compute the number of APxRn register based on the number of priorities > >> instead of using the number of preemption levels. > >> > >> I've tagged the first 4 patches for stable, given that we're doing > >> something potentially harmful. The last patch is more of a theoretical > >> issue at this stage, so probably need for a backport. > > > > Would you like me to apply them, or are you looking for reviews and > > going to send them in a pull request? > > > > I can wait a couple days before sending my own pull request to Linus. > > Christoffer is in charge of the tree at the moment, so I'll leave it up > to him to decide. But my guess is that he will send a PR some time > later, with the rest of the fixes that have been posted lately. > Yes, I have some other fixes that I'll send together with these as soon as -rc1 hits. And I plan on reviewing these. Thanks, -Christoffer