From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from bombadil.infradead.org (bombadil.infradead.org [198.137.202.133]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 67F00C433F5 for ; Mon, 30 May 2022 19:38:46 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lists.infradead.org; s=bombadil.20210309; h=Sender: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type:List-Subscribe:List-Help:List-Post: List-Archive:List-Unsubscribe:List-Id:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:References: Message-ID:Subject:Cc:To:From:Date:Reply-To:Content-ID:Content-Description: Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID: List-Owner; bh=hr2zyJ4i7rEWiJc8qi+jMp8pp3J2ea6j2uU2NSuj2yA=; b=cY4vBly5MmqQSj dOWz9OS6gsyPbIeMi+XyOOeAm+rc3lSG9expGh7Hc2cHGYE0J6kOBmgcJdiB6tuAl8jouyUABeRnz 8XJQ0/t40GzNeI9XKlDQUr8Qa55eYUxOofU/Ie1TebufCGdupbLOi6iMBYIIv43g/JhM5d61cIK0I IlZpwQuzdDMApefrSIo9ynLZdxHtu8OkqdYSbd3LWvcJ6D1jnUz1eDGu0GOwtG0sVO9Mu9cH2VQyp q/A0DHuu0PhCtVF5KGkbXlfjKWsFtpQqLr4BRBIbSCphYS5HAWDFEiDv6V53CSUpHs/Xy8SNkyBKJ 2YFYph3Q5/VNAldgI59Q==; Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=bombadil.infradead.org) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.94.2 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1nvlCi-00848b-Af; Mon, 30 May 2022 19:37:28 +0000 Received: from dfw.source.kernel.org ([139.178.84.217]) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.94.2 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1nvlCe-008488-R7 for linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org; Mon, 30 May 2022 19:37:26 +0000 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (relay.kernel.org [52.25.139.140]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by dfw.source.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A295260EE7; Mon, 30 May 2022 19:37:23 +0000 (UTC) Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 801CAC385B8; Mon, 30 May 2022 19:37:22 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=linuxfoundation.org; s=korg; t=1653939443; bh=N++pdaqxxR3mfmUMBn2HNu9rkyihptoWh1TrpMRBdys=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=xztIAB4G5ZyIVNwBARbpTyYCuuretroT66NXzmhntA8dW2REk1RzcHREzSeqa0dUJ +T/Csb4a2YlAPLSIhFbfUm8j1cVt3r7/78CVFpKXQxukReAOMDb6anzvCzYN7CRUHu N1S4FOZKyy2uO8RgOnAuMvqj3ffycmVnHvpS+t80= Date: Mon, 30 May 2022 21:37:19 +0200 From: Greg KH To: Ard Biesheuvel Cc: Russell King , Sasha Levin , Linux Kernel Mailing List , "# 3.4.x" , Russell King , Linus Walleij , Nicolas Pitre , Keith Packard , Arnd Bergmann , Linux ARM Subject: Re: [PATCH AUTOSEL 5.18 147/159] ARM: 9201/1: spectre-bhb: rely on linker to emit cross-section literal loads Message-ID: References: <20220530132425.1929512-1-sashal@kernel.org> <20220530132425.1929512-147-sashal@kernel.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: X-CRM114-Version: 20100106-BlameMichelson ( TRE 0.8.0 (BSD) ) MR-646709E3 X-CRM114-CacheID: sfid-20220530_123724_997519_612BA9AE X-CRM114-Status: GOOD ( 35.94 ) X-BeenThere: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.34 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: "linux-arm-kernel" Errors-To: linux-arm-kernel-bounces+linux-arm-kernel=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org On Mon, May 30, 2022 at 05:56:09PM +0200, Ard Biesheuvel wrote: > On Mon, 30 May 2022 at 17:25, Greg KH wrote: > > > > On Mon, May 30, 2022 at 03:32:47PM +0200, Ard Biesheuvel wrote: > > > AUTONAK > > > > > > As discussed before, please disregard all patches authored by me when > > > running the bot. > > > > Ok, but why wasn't this spectre-bhb commit asked to be backported to > > stable in the first place? > > Because it doesn't belong in -stable. Hence the lack of cc:stable or > fixes: tags. > > > Do older kernels not need these types of > > fixes? > > > > This commit was part of a series of six, two of which were bug fixes > and had fixes: tags. They do not have cc:stable tags because the > 'fixed' patches had not been backported yet when they were sent out. > > So those are clear candidates for -stable, and as far as I can tell, > they have already been backported. Great, thanks for verifying. > This patch does not fix a bug. It makes the asm code more resilient to > potential bugs introduced inadvertently by future changes, which will > be harder to detect now that we have three different versions of the > exception vector table. (Any given system will only exercise one of > the three, depending on whether and which Spectre-BHB workaround it > requires) Ok, that's good to know, it was not obvious from the changelog text that this wasn't doing anything but a cleanup. > I build and boot test my patches carefully, and so I consciously > decided that the regression risk of backporting this patch outweighs > the benefits. This is why I did not add a cc:stable or fixes: tag. If > a tag existed that said 'do not backport this unless explicitly > requested', I would have added it. > > I would expect anyone that proposes this patch for -stable to be as > diligent in ensuring that the patch is safe for backporting, which > includes building the code with older GCC versions that those stable > kernels still support, and boot testing the result on actual hardware. > > If this is part of the AUTOSEL workflow, then I stand corrected. But > even then, this does not mean that the patch *belongs* in -stable. As > you know, I enjoy throwing stable-kernel-rules.rst in your face, and I > am pretty sure that using a bot to find patches that apply cleanly and > happen not to cause build breakage is not covered by the criteria > defined by that document by any stretch of the imagination. > > On top of that, I feel that 'saving' precious stable maintainer's time > by using a bot to offload this burden to the community uninvited is > really not ok. We work very hard to keep highly heterogeneous > architectures such as ARM working across all supported platforms, and > this is work enough as it is without all the bogus patches that > AUTOSEL digs up without *any* justification beyond 'hey, it applies!' If you want to keep arm-core stuff out of the AUTOSEL process, because you all do a good job of marking stuff already properly, that's fine, Sasha can easily do that, just let us know. thanks, greg k-h _______________________________________________ linux-arm-kernel mailing list linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel