From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail.linuxfoundation.org ([140.211.169.12]:56454 "EHLO mail.linuxfoundation.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751167AbeDDO1E (ORCPT ); Wed, 4 Apr 2018 10:27:04 -0400 Date: Wed, 4 Apr 2018 16:27:02 +0200 From: Greg KH To: Juergen Gross Cc: stable , Boris Ostrovsky , xen-devel Subject: Re: Patches for stable Message-ID: <20180404142702.GA20460@kroah.com> References: 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: On Wed, Apr 04, 2018 at 12:38:43PM +0200, Juergen Gross wrote: > Please add the patches: > > commit 038bac2b02989acf1fc938cedcb7944c02672b9f upstream > commit dfc9327ab7c99bc13e12106448615efba833886b upstream > commit b17d9d1df3c33a4f1d2bf397e2257aecf9dc56d4 upstream > > to the 4.15 and 4.16 stable kernels. > > Those patches are needed to boot Linux as PVH guest on recent Xen. So a new feature? Why is that ok for stable kernels? > In PVH mode there is no guarantee the kernel can find the RSDP table > at the legacy location in low memory, which is a requirement for the > kernel to boot successful without those patches. Why not just use newer kernels for new Xen features? This really doesn't look like a bugfix to me, does it to you? thanks, greg k-h