Re: preparations for 4.16.1

[Jan Beulich <jbeulich@xxxxxxxx>]

On 10.03.2022 12:14, Andrew Cooper wrote:
> On 10/03/2022 10:35, Jan Beulich wrote:
>> On 10.03.2022 11:20, Andrew Cooper wrote:
>>> On 10/03/2022 09:01, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>>> On 10.03.2022 09:57, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>>>> Please point out backports you find missing from the respective staging
>>>>> branch, but which you consider relevant. One I have queued already, but
>>>>> which I'd like to put in only once the pending fix to it ("x86: avoid
>>>>> SORT_BY_INIT_PRIORITY with old GNU ld") has also landed in staging, is
>>>>>
>>>>> 4b7fd8153ddf x86: fold sections in final binaries
>>>> Actually the other one I'm aware of is
>>>>
>>>> 7d9589239ec0 x86/CET: Fix S3 resume with shadow stacks active
>>>>
>>>> which Andrew promised to provide a suitable backport for.
>>> So now XSA-398 is public, I can say what that slightly cryptically meant.
>>>
>>> The CET S3 fix depends on one of the code rearrangements introduced in
>>> the CET-IBT work.  We were intending to have CET-IBT backported for the
>>> tuesday embargo (didn't go to plan), after which the S3 fix would be a
>>> trivial backport to 4.14 and later.
>> I was indeed wondering. Even if this didn't work out in time, aiui the
>> plan still is to have that backported (without going the manual annotation
>> route). Do you expect this to be feasible in time (and not at the last
>> minute) for 4.16.1?
> 
> The answer is largely dependent on how long it takes to resolve the
> remaining issues on staging (although most are done now.  I'm sifting
> through things for a commit sweep).
> 
> Early next week, assuming no additional fun is found?

Early next week would certainly be faster than what I was hoping for ...

Jan