From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail.linutronix.de (193.142.43.55:993) by crypto-ml.lab.linutronix.de with IMAP4-SSL for ; 28 Apr 2020 14:54:11 -0000 Received: from mga05.intel.com ([192.55.52.43]) by Galois.linutronix.de with esmtps (TLS1.2:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA256:256) (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1jTRcg-0004Zo-Dp for speck@linutronix.de; Tue, 28 Apr 2020 16:54:10 +0200 Received: from localhost (mtg-dev.jf.intel.com [10.54.74.10]) by smtp.ostc.intel.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 731676369 for ; Tue, 28 Apr 2020 14:54:07 +0000 (UTC) Date: Tue, 28 Apr 2020 07:54:07 -0700 From: mark gross Subject: [MODERATED] Re: [PATCH 0/5] Slow Randomizing Boosts DoS v4.4.219 backport 0 Message-ID: <20200428145407.GB120520@mtg-dev.jf.intel.com> Reply-To: mgross@linux.intel.com References: <87mu6wpvnc.fsf@nanos.tec.linutronix.de> <87k120pv7k.fsf@nanos.tec.linutronix.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <87k120pv7k.fsf@nanos.tec.linutronix.de> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: speck@linutronix.de List-ID: On Mon, Apr 27, 2020 at 09:47:11PM +0200, speck for Thomas Gleixner wrote: > Thomas Gleixner writes: > > speck for mark gross writes: > >> From: mark gross > >> Subject: [PATCH 0/5] Slow Ranomizing Boosts DoS linux-4.4.y backport > >> > >> This is a backport of the backports done by Thomas for linux-4.14.y to > >> linux-4.4.y. > >> > >> The backport needed a backport of one additional dependency for > >> cpu_data-x86_mask getting renamed to x86_stepping. > >> > >> This was tested by the test engineer who tested the other SRBDS implementations > >> and it seems to work. > >> > >> > >> Jia Zhang (1): > >> x86/cpu: Rename cpu_data.x86_mask to cpu_data.x86_stepping > > > > This one is missing and rightfully so. Maybe you get your mail setup for > > sending patches right some day in the future. > > > > This one has in the mail headers: > > > > In-Reply-To: > > References: > > From: Jia Zhang > > Date: Mon, 1 Jan 2018 09:52:10 +0800 > > > > While it's correct that the patch is from Jia and was written on Jan. 1 > > 2018, neither the From: nor the Date: header in the mail are correct. > > > > That's commit b399151cb48db30ad1e0e93dd40d68c6d007b637 upstream. Do we > > really want to backport that thing to 4.4 or just live with the uglies > > of x86_cpuinfo::x86_mask ? > > Fished it out from the moderator mail, applied it to 4.4.y and then ran: > > # git grep 'x86_mask' > arch/x86/kernel/cpu/amd.c: if (c->x86_model <= 1 && c->x86_mask <= 1) yeah, I caught that in my backport that failed to send for some reason. There were a few places needing fixups. > I clearly can see how that was tested. I didn't test your backport of course. But, I did do a allyesconfig build that hit that and then I followed up with a similar git grep. FWIW : 1915 git checkout srbs-linux-4.4.y 1916 git cherry-pick 06be007aa436a Then I did a few fixups including the same git grep x86_mask and allyes and allmod builds. --mark