From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp-8faa.mail.infomaniak.ch (smtp-8faa.mail.infomaniak.ch [83.166.143.170]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7EE54161331 for ; Tue, 7 May 2024 15:42:41 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=83.166.143.170 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1715096565; cv=none; b=cJ4JZU/zhTFj0rFq4wA/lOwR6+CA4IsfEM8eJBP4eSf5zQS/5ZuFch8egxgKO4tfNIL20Q+xIxi2J7c5wdausCunmxHhlUoQk9i+tyLyMC3dqF8cyjEP/uIAQXPQauTXBVX/XSgsa2OnUIBujuXjrpjAFvVuEBMqgx+l2M5RrLQ= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1715096565; c=relaxed/simple; bh=tG7GC4Detn+hIijiFJM2CHvKICrWG0m6s3hG3mjp4q8=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=UeE5iYhRuahKvibI6iIX9b4gsv05fm4QHlBdToNWSG7e41mbiXEvIxBoqYTwbYE/PGYkT4zE+5bx+Gg8797WN0cU8Eft6lIBFpF9wZfTxqJwI7QhRakH0GUbzu06gdusNtN5Rv3vck6RQtvKjsmvnFUlDyOhHLK4DmVhiDu9He0= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=digikod.net; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=digikod.net; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=digikod.net header.i=@digikod.net header.b=MUOnRR6p; arc=none smtp.client-ip=83.166.143.170 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=digikod.net Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=digikod.net Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=digikod.net header.i=@digikod.net header.b="MUOnRR6p" Received: from smtp-4-0001.mail.infomaniak.ch (smtp-4-0001.mail.infomaniak.ch [10.7.10.108]) by smtp-3-3000.mail.infomaniak.ch (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4VYjG70TZqz7Y0; Tue, 7 May 2024 17:42:39 +0200 (CEST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=digikod.net; s=20191114; t=1715096558; bh=tG7GC4Detn+hIijiFJM2CHvKICrWG0m6s3hG3mjp4q8=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=MUOnRR6pm2mGnKlpB/Nx/dz12RcHc2yr2ELwVY5eOLXq+GbViBrtPNka3Kz/TNG1G IXKw6TApqZkuD21ikd/ZZkAzz3GK8OguOaVYUg/E3n8Uy4YsQVND5YqqjlHnJjIl1E mAJ2LaDL5NK9EBeihxeYw60XkVtzrqtRprU+xOsQ= Received: from unknown by smtp-4-0001.mail.infomaniak.ch (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 4VYjG42vCWzb2J; Tue, 7 May 2024 17:42:36 +0200 (CEST) Date: Tue, 7 May 2024 17:42:34 +0200 From: =?utf-8?Q?Micka=C3=ABl_Sala=C3=BCn?= To: Sean Christopherson Cc: Kees Cook , Christian Brauner , Greg Kroah-Hartman , Jakub Kicinski , Linus Torvalds , Mark Brown , Sasha Levin , Shengyu Li , Shuah Khan , Shuah Khan , Bagas Sanjaya , Brendan Higgins , David Gow , "David S . Miller" , Florian Fainelli , =?utf-8?Q?G=C3=BCnther?= Noack , Jon Hunter , Ron Economos , Ronald Warsow , Stephen Rothwell , Will Drewry , kernel test robot , kvm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org, stable@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 00/10] Fix Kselftest's vfork() side effects Message-ID: <20240507.aevi0xaeWohb@digikod.net> References: <20240506165518.474504-1-mic@digikod.net> <202405061002.01D399877A@keescook> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: netdev@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: X-Infomaniak-Routing: alpha On Tue, May 07, 2024 at 07:12:51AM GMT, Sean Christopherson wrote: > On Mon, May 06, 2024, Kees Cook wrote: > > On Mon, May 06, 2024 at 06:55:08PM +0200, Mickaël Salaün wrote: > > > Shuah, I think this should be in -next really soon to make sure > > > everything works fine for the v6.9 release, which is not currently the > > > case. I cannot test against all kselftests though. I would prefer to > > > let you handle this, but I guess you're not able to do so and I'll push > > > it on my branch without reply from you. Even if I push it on my branch, > > > please push it on yours too as soon as you see this and I'll remove it > > > from mine. > > > > Yes, please. Getting this into v6.9 is preferred, > > Very strongly prefered for KVM selftests. The negative impact on KVM isn't that > the bugs cause failures, it's that they cause false passes, which is far worse > (and why the bugs went unnoticed for most of the cycle). FYI it's now in linux-next.