From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-pl1-f194.google.com ([209.85.214.194]:35315 "EHLO mail-pl1-f194.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726508AbeHYAz2 (ORCPT ); Fri, 24 Aug 2018 20:55:28 -0400 Date: Fri, 24 Aug 2018 14:19:07 -0700 From: Guenter Roeck To: Roland Dreier Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman , Ben Hutchings , LKML , stable@vger.kernel.org, matt@codeblueprint.co.uk, bp@suse.de, Andrew Morton , Andy Lutomirski , luto@kernel.org, Ard Biesheuvel , bp@alien8.de, brgerst@gmail.com, davej@codemonkey.org.uk, dvlasenk@redhat.com, "H. Peter Anvin" , Linus Torvalds , Peter Zijlstra , sai.praneeth.prakhya@intel.com, sds@tycho.nsa.gov, Thomas Gleixner , toshi.kani@hp.com, linux-efi@vger.kernel.org, Ingo Molnar , Yazen.Ghannam@amd.com, Andi Kleen Subject: Re: [PATCH 4.4 103/105] Revert "x86/mm/pat: Ensure cpa->pfn only contains page frame numbers" Message-ID: <20180824211907.GA9593@roeck-us.net> References: <20171215092305.994559179@linuxfoundation.org> <20171215092311.347628971@linuxfoundation.org> <1535129126.2902.36.camel@codethink.co.uk> <20180824191749.GA15489@kroah.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: stable-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: +Andi Kleen On Fri, Aug 24, 2018 at 01:04:09PM -0700, Roland Dreier wrote: > > Ok, so what patch should be reverted? I'm seeing other reports of > > problems all around this same area, but I can't figure out exactly what > > to do. > > Are any of those reports public? If so can you point me at them, I'm > curious if the symptoms match up. > > I don't think we want to revert anything. I think you should pull in > edc3b9129cec and at least the first three patches that Ben listed: > > 21cdb6b56843 x86/mm: Page align the '_end' symbol to avoid pfn conversion bugs > b61a76f8850d x86/efi: Map RAM into the identity page table for mixed mode > 753b11ef8e92 x86/efi: Setup separate EFI page tables in kexec paths > > the first patch takes a bit of massaging (mostly because some of it is > already touched by 02ff2769edbc, which keeps the changes from > edc3b9129cec, and so we can drop a good bit when applying). The other > three apply cleanly. > > I'm currently testing that and can send you the state of my tree in a bit. > > - R.