Re: [PATCH v2 5/8] x86/mtrr: revert commit 90b926e68f50

[Juergen Gross <jgross@suse.com>]

[-- Attachment #1.1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1722 bytes --]

On 13.02.23 12:46, Christian Kujau wrote:
> On Mon, 13 Feb 2023, Juergen Gross wrote:
>> On 10.02.23 19:59, Linux regression tracking (Thorsten Leemhuis) wrote:
>>> Hi, this is your Linux kernel regression tracker.
>>>
>>> On 09.02.23 08:22, Juergen Gross wrote:
>>>> Commit 90b926e68f50 ("x86/pat: Fix pat_x_mtrr_type() for MTRR disabled
>>>> case") has introduced a regression with Xen.
>>>>
>>>> Revert the patch.
>>>
>>> That regression you refer to is afaics one I'm tracking[1] that was
>>> introduced this cycle. That makes me wonder: could this patch be applied
>>> directly to fix the issue quickly? Or are patches 1 to 4 needed as well
>>> (or the whole series?) to avoid other problems?
>>
>> Patches 1-4 are needed, too, as otherwise the issue claimed to be fixed
>> with patch 5 would show up again.
> 
> The (last?) -rc8 version was released yesterday. Would it be possible to
> include at least (only) the revert in mainline so that 6.2 will be
> released with a working storage configuration under Xen?

Hmm, this would make Hyper-V SEV-SNP guests slow again.

I'm not completely against it, but OTOH I'm a little bit biased as the
maintainer of the Xen code. :-)

Michael, would you see major problems with doing the revert before having
the final patches for fixing your issue, too?

> Otherwise one would have to carry around that single revert manually until
> this patch series has landed in mainline, or convince all the
> distributions to do so :-\
> 
> Anyway, thanks for fixing this problem, I did not expect this to be such a
> complicated issue when I reported that thing :-)

Yes, I have opened a can of worms with my MTRR/PAT disentangling.


Juergen

[-- Attachment #1.1.2: OpenPGP public key --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-keys, Size: 3149 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 495 bytes --]