Stable backport request

Stable backport request

[Michael Ellerman]

Hi Greg,

Please backport the following commit to v5.4 and v5.10:

  73287caa9210ded6066833195f4335f7f688a46b
  ("powerpc64/idle: Fix SP offsets when saving GPRs")


And please backport the following commits to v5.4, v5.10 and v5.14:

  9b4416c5095c20e110c82ae602c254099b83b72f
  ("KVM: PPC: Book3S HV: Fix stack handling in idle_kvm_start_guest()")

  cdeb5d7d890e14f3b70e8087e745c4a6a7d9f337
  ("KVM: PPC: Book3S HV: Make idle_kvm_start_guest() return 0 if it went to guest")

  496c5fe25c377ddb7815c4ce8ecfb676f051e9b6
  ("powerpc/idle: Don't corrupt back chain when going idle")


cheers

Re: Stable backport request

[Greg KH]

On Sun, Oct 24, 2021 at 09:21:09AM +1100, Michael Ellerman wrote:
> Hi Greg,
> 
> Please backport the following commit to v5.4 and v5.10:
> 
>   73287caa9210ded6066833195f4335f7f688a46b
>   ("powerpc64/idle: Fix SP offsets when saving GPRs")
> 
> 
> And please backport the following commits to v5.4, v5.10 and v5.14:
> 
>   9b4416c5095c20e110c82ae602c254099b83b72f
>   ("KVM: PPC: Book3S HV: Fix stack handling in idle_kvm_start_guest()")
> 
>   cdeb5d7d890e14f3b70e8087e745c4a6a7d9f337
>   ("KVM: PPC: Book3S HV: Make idle_kvm_start_guest() return 0 if it went to guest")
> 
>   496c5fe25c377ddb7815c4ce8ecfb676f051e9b6
>   ("powerpc/idle: Don't corrupt back chain when going idle")

All now queued up, thanks!

greg k-h

Stable backport request

[Mimi Zohar]

Stable team,

Please backport these upstream commits to stable kernels:
- c7423dbdbc9e ("ima: Handle -ESTALE returned by
ima_filter_rule_match()"

Dependency on:
- d57378d3aa4d ("ima: Simplify ima_lsm_copy_rule")

Known minor merge conflicts:
- Commit: 65603435599f ("ima: Fix trivial typos in the comments") fixed
"refrences" spelling, causes a merge conflict.
- Commit 28073eb09c5a ("ima: Fix fall-through warnings for Clang") adds
a "break;" before "default:", causes a merge conflict.

Simplifies backporting to linux-5.4.y:
- 465aee77aae8 ("ima: Free the entire rule when deleting a list of
rules")
  except for the line "kfree(entry->keyrings);" - introduced in 5.6.y.
- 39e5993d0d45 ("ima: Shallow copy the args_p member of
ima_rule_entry.lsm elements")
- b8867eedcf76 ("ima: Rename internal filter rule functions")
- f60c826d0318 ("ima: Use kmemdup rather than kmalloc+memcpy")

A patch for kernels prior to commit b16942455193 ("ima: use the lsm
policy
update notifier") will be posted separately.

thanks,

Mimi

Re: Stable backport request

[Greg KH]

On Wed, Dec 21, 2022 at 09:50:09AM -0500, Mimi Zohar wrote:
> Stable team,
> 
> Please backport these upstream commits to stable kernels:
> - c7423dbdbc9e ("ima: Handle -ESTALE returned by
> ima_filter_rule_match()"
> 
> Dependency on:
> - d57378d3aa4d ("ima: Simplify ima_lsm_copy_rule")
> 
> Known minor merge conflicts:
> - Commit: 65603435599f ("ima: Fix trivial typos in the comments") fixed
> "refrences" spelling, causes a merge conflict.
> - Commit 28073eb09c5a ("ima: Fix fall-through warnings for Clang") adds
> a "break;" before "default:", causes a merge conflict.
> 
> Simplifies backporting to linux-5.4.y:
> - 465aee77aae8 ("ima: Free the entire rule when deleting a list of
> rules")
>   except for the line "kfree(entry->keyrings);" - introduced in 5.6.y.
> - 39e5993d0d45 ("ima: Shallow copy the args_p member of
> ima_rule_entry.lsm elements")
> - b8867eedcf76 ("ima: Rename internal filter rule functions")
> - f60c826d0318 ("ima: Use kmemdup rather than kmalloc+memcpy")

I'm sorry, but I'm confused.

What exact commits are needed in what order for which stable trees?

> A patch for kernels prior to commit b16942455193 ("ima: use the lsm
> policy
> update notifier") will be posted separately.

But that commit has been backported to 4.19.y and newer stable trees,
right?

confused,

greg k-h

Re: Stable backport request

[Mimi Zohar]

Hi Greg,

On Wed, 2022-12-21 at 19:22 +0100, Greg KH wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 21, 2022 at 09:50:09AM -0500, Mimi Zohar wrote:
> > Stable team,
> > 
> > Please backport these upstream commits to stable kernels:
> > - c7423dbdbc9e ("ima: Handle -ESTALE returned by
> > ima_filter_rule_match()"
> > 
> > Dependency on:
> > - d57378d3aa4d ("ima: Simplify ima_lsm_copy_rule")
> > 
> > Known minor merge conflicts:
> > - Commit: 65603435599f ("ima: Fix trivial typos in the comments") fixed
> > "refrences" spelling, causes a merge conflict.
> > - Commit 28073eb09c5a ("ima: Fix fall-through warnings for Clang") adds
> > a "break;" before "default:", causes a merge conflict.

Up to linux-5.9.y, there are two merge conflicts - a spelling error and
a missing "break" before "default:", which are the result of the above
commits.  Otherwise the two commits apply cleanly:
 - d57378d3aa4d ("ima: Simplify ima_lsm_copy_rule")
 - c7423dbdbc9e ("ima: Handle -ESTALE returned by
ima_filter_rule_match()"

> > Simplifies backporting to linux-5.4.y:
> > - 465aee77aae8 ("ima: Free the entire rule when deleting a list of
> > rules")
> >   except for the line "kfree(entry->keyrings);" - introduced in 5.6.y.
> > - 39e5993d0d45 ("ima: Shallow copy the args_p member of
> > ima_rule_entry.lsm elements")
> > - b8867eedcf76 ("ima: Rename internal filter rule functions")
> > - f60c826d0318 ("ima: Use kmemdup rather than kmalloc+memcpy")
> 
> I'm sorry, but I'm confused.
> 
> What exact commits are needed in what order for which stable trees?

The above 4 commits are needed, in the order listed, for linux-5.4.y
before applying these two commits:
 - d57378d3aa4d ("ima: Simplify ima_lsm_copy_rule")
 - c7423dbdbc9e ("ima: Handle -ESTALE returned by
ima_filter_rule_match()"

> > A patch for kernels prior to commit b16942455193 ("ima: use the lsm
> > policy update notifier") will be posted separately.
> 
> But that commit has been backported to 4.19.y and newer stable trees,
> right?

No, b16942455193 ("ima: use the lsm policy update notifier") was
upstreamed in linux-5.3.y and has not been backported to linux-4.19.y. 
We're still determining for linux-4.19.y the best way to address the
bug that commit c7423dbdbc9e ("ima: Handle -ESTALE returned by
ima_filter_rule_match()") addresses.

> 
> confused,

I hope this clarifies things...

-- 
thanks,

Mimi

Re: Stable backport request

[Greg KH]

On Wed, Dec 21, 2022 at 01:52:09PM -0500, Mimi Zohar wrote:
> Hi Greg,
> 
> On Wed, 2022-12-21 at 19:22 +0100, Greg KH wrote:
> > On Wed, Dec 21, 2022 at 09:50:09AM -0500, Mimi Zohar wrote:
> > > Stable team,
> > > 
> > > Please backport these upstream commits to stable kernels:
> > > - c7423dbdbc9e ("ima: Handle -ESTALE returned by
> > > ima_filter_rule_match()"
> > > 
> > > Dependency on:
> > > - d57378d3aa4d ("ima: Simplify ima_lsm_copy_rule")
> > > 
> > > Known minor merge conflicts:
> > > - Commit: 65603435599f ("ima: Fix trivial typos in the comments") fixed
> > > "refrences" spelling, causes a merge conflict.
> > > - Commit 28073eb09c5a ("ima: Fix fall-through warnings for Clang") adds
> > > a "break;" before "default:", causes a merge conflict.
> 
> Up to linux-5.9.y, there are two merge conflicts - a spelling error and
> a missing "break" before "default:", which are the result of the above
> commits.  Otherwise the two commits apply cleanly:
>  - d57378d3aa4d ("ima: Simplify ima_lsm_copy_rule")
>  - c7423dbdbc9e ("ima: Handle -ESTALE returned by
> ima_filter_rule_match()"

Again, this isn't going to work, I need backported commits that have
been tested and verified to work please.

> 
> > > Simplifies backporting to linux-5.4.y:
> > > - 465aee77aae8 ("ima: Free the entire rule when deleting a list of
> > > rules")
> > >   except for the line "kfree(entry->keyrings);" - introduced in 5.6.y.
> > > - 39e5993d0d45 ("ima: Shallow copy the args_p member of
> > > ima_rule_entry.lsm elements")
> > > - b8867eedcf76 ("ima: Rename internal filter rule functions")
> > > - f60c826d0318 ("ima: Use kmemdup rather than kmalloc+memcpy")
> > 
> > I'm sorry, but I'm confused.
> > 
> > What exact commits are needed in what order for which stable trees?
> 
> The above 4 commits are needed, in the order listed, for linux-5.4.y
> before applying these two commits:
>  - d57378d3aa4d ("ima: Simplify ima_lsm_copy_rule")
>  - c7423dbdbc9e ("ima: Handle -ESTALE returned by
> ima_filter_rule_match()"
> 
> > > A patch for kernels prior to commit b16942455193 ("ima: use the lsm
> > > policy update notifier") will be posted separately.
> > 
> > But that commit has been backported to 4.19.y and newer stable trees,
> > right?
> 
> No, b16942455193 ("ima: use the lsm policy update notifier") was
> upstreamed in linux-5.3.y and has not been backported to linux-4.19.y. 
> We're still determining for linux-4.19.y the best way to address the
> bug that commit c7423dbdbc9e ("ima: Handle -ESTALE returned by
> ima_filter_rule_match()") addresses.

It would be easiest if you just send a series of backported commits that
you have tested, otherwise I will get the above instructions wrong :)

thanks,

greg k-h

stable backport request

[Ard Biesheuvel]

Please backport

b3810c5a2cc4a6665f7a65bed5393c75ce3f3aa2
x86/efistub: Clear decompressor BSS in native EFI entrypoint

to stable kernels v6.1 and newer.

Thanks,
Ard.

Re: stable backport request

[Salvatore Bonaccorso]

Hi,

On Tue, Mar 19, 2024 at 08:21:49AM +0100, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
> Please backport
> 
> b3810c5a2cc4a6665f7a65bed5393c75ce3f3aa2
> x86/efistub: Clear decompressor BSS in native EFI entrypoint
> 
> to stable kernels v6.1 and newer.

So on top of that as well df7ecce842b846a04d087ba85fdb79a90e26a1b0
which fixes the above commit.

Regards,
Salvatore