[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [PATCH for-4.15 0/3] x86/msr: Fixes for XSA-351 [and 1 more messages]
Ian Jackson writes ("Re: [PATCH for-4.15 0/3] x86/msr: Fixes for XSA-351 [and 1 more messages]"): > Andrew Cooper writes ("[PATCH for-4.15 0/3] x86/msr: Fixes for XSA-351"): > > This is slightly complicated. Patches 1 and 2 rearrange the code to look > > and > > behave more like 4.14, and patch 3 fixes a Solaris (and turbostat) bug in a > > manner which can be backported to all security trees. > > As far as I can tell this series needs a respin ? > > I have been through the thread and AFAICT the only comments were on > the commit message for patch 2. Patchex 1 and 3 already have a > release-ack. Patch 2 does not have any mind of maintainer review. Err, this is wrong. It is [PATCH 1/3] Revert "x86/msr: drop compatibility #GP handling in guest_{rd, wr}msr()" which has comments on the commit message from Jan: So would you mind adjusting the description accordingly? [...] "In hindsight, this was a poor move [..,] and Roger: I think it might be worth adding that guest access to those MSRs will now always trigger a #GP [...] I could easily fold in Jan's comments but it would be better for someone more familiar with the code do handle Roger's since Roger doesn't provide a precise wording. These two [PATCH 2/3] x86/msr: Forward port XSA-351 changes from 4.14 [PATCH 3/3] x86/msr: Fix Solaris and turbostat following XSA-351 have reviews from Roger. > I would like this series to go in today. > > Jan, since Andrew doesn't seem to have been able to do that respin > yet, would you be able to rewrite the commit message of message 2 > taking into account the two comments from you an from Roger ? > > I think that is all that's needed for these three to go into tree. Ian.
|
![]() |
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |