* Re: Request to backport "Documentation: Document arm64 kpti control"
@ 2020-01-27 15:51 ` Greg Kroah-Hartman
0 siblings, 0 replies; 12+ messages in thread
From: Greg Kroah-Hartman @ 2020-01-27 15:51 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Sasha Levin
Cc: moderated list:ARM/FREESCALE IMX / MXC ARM ARCHITECTURE,
Florian Fainelli, stable, Jeremy Linton
On Sun, Jan 26, 2020 at 08:52:33AM -0500, Sasha Levin wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 25, 2020 at 08:03:25PM -0800, Florian Fainelli wrote:
> > Hi Greg, Sasha,
> >
> > Could you backport upstream commit
> > de19055564c8f8f9d366f8db3395836da0b2176c ("Documentation: Document arm64
> > kpti control") to the stable 4.9, 4.14 and 4.19 kernels since they all
> > support the command line parameter.
>
> Hey Florian,
>
> We don't normally take documentation patches into stable trees.
Normally we do not, but this is simple enough I've queued it up for 4.19
and 4.14. Are you sure it is ok for 4.9? If so, Florian, can you
provide a backported version of it?
thanks,
greg k-h
_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread* Re: Request to backport "Documentation: Document arm64 kpti control"
2020-01-27 15:51 ` Greg Kroah-Hartman
@ 2020-01-27 18:47 ` Florian Fainelli
-1 siblings, 0 replies; 12+ messages in thread
From: Florian Fainelli @ 2020-01-27 18:47 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Greg Kroah-Hartman, Sasha Levin
Cc: Jeremy Linton, stable,
moderated list:ARM/FREESCALE IMX / MXC ARM ARCHITECTURE
On 1/27/20 7:51 AM, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 26, 2020 at 08:52:33AM -0500, Sasha Levin wrote:
>> On Sat, Jan 25, 2020 at 08:03:25PM -0800, Florian Fainelli wrote:
>>> Hi Greg, Sasha,
>>>
>>> Could you backport upstream commit
>>> de19055564c8f8f9d366f8db3395836da0b2176c ("Documentation: Document arm64
>>> kpti control") to the stable 4.9, 4.14 and 4.19 kernels since they all
>>> support the command line parameter.
>>
>> Hey Florian,
>>
>> We don't normally take documentation patches into stable trees.
>
> Normally we do not, but this is simple enough I've queued it up for 4.19
> and 4.14. Are you sure it is ok for 4.9? If so, Florian, can you
> provide a backported version of it?
Yes, I am positive this parameter is relevant for the stable-4.9 tree, too:
git show linux-stable/linux-4.9.y
static int __init parse_kpti(char *str)
{
bool enabled;
int ret = strtobool(str, &enabled);
if (ret)
return ret;
__kpti_forced = enabled ? 1 : -1;
return 0;
}
early_param("kpti", parse_kpti);
I will be sending you a targeted patch in a short while.
--
Florian
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread* Re: Request to backport "Documentation: Document arm64 kpti control"
@ 2020-01-27 18:47 ` Florian Fainelli
0 siblings, 0 replies; 12+ messages in thread
From: Florian Fainelli @ 2020-01-27 18:47 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Greg Kroah-Hartman, Sasha Levin
Cc: moderated list:ARM/FREESCALE IMX / MXC ARM ARCHITECTURE, stable,
Jeremy Linton
On 1/27/20 7:51 AM, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 26, 2020 at 08:52:33AM -0500, Sasha Levin wrote:
>> On Sat, Jan 25, 2020 at 08:03:25PM -0800, Florian Fainelli wrote:
>>> Hi Greg, Sasha,
>>>
>>> Could you backport upstream commit
>>> de19055564c8f8f9d366f8db3395836da0b2176c ("Documentation: Document arm64
>>> kpti control") to the stable 4.9, 4.14 and 4.19 kernels since they all
>>> support the command line parameter.
>>
>> Hey Florian,
>>
>> We don't normally take documentation patches into stable trees.
>
> Normally we do not, but this is simple enough I've queued it up for 4.19
> and 4.14. Are you sure it is ok for 4.9? If so, Florian, can you
> provide a backported version of it?
Yes, I am positive this parameter is relevant for the stable-4.9 tree, too:
git show linux-stable/linux-4.9.y
static int __init parse_kpti(char *str)
{
bool enabled;
int ret = strtobool(str, &enabled);
if (ret)
return ret;
__kpti_forced = enabled ? 1 : -1;
return 0;
}
early_param("kpti", parse_kpti);
I will be sending you a targeted patch in a short while.
--
Florian
_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread
* Re: Request to backport "Documentation: Document arm64 kpti control"
2020-01-27 15:51 ` Greg Kroah-Hartman
@ 2020-01-29 19:16 ` Sasha Levin
-1 siblings, 0 replies; 12+ messages in thread
From: Sasha Levin @ 2020-01-29 19:16 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Greg Kroah-Hartman
Cc: Florian Fainelli, Jeremy Linton, stable,
moderated list:ARM/FREESCALE IMX / MXC ARM ARCHITECTURE
On Mon, Jan 27, 2020 at 04:51:06PM +0100, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
>On Sun, Jan 26, 2020 at 08:52:33AM -0500, Sasha Levin wrote:
>> On Sat, Jan 25, 2020 at 08:03:25PM -0800, Florian Fainelli wrote:
>> > Hi Greg, Sasha,
>> >
>> > Could you backport upstream commit
>> > de19055564c8f8f9d366f8db3395836da0b2176c ("Documentation: Document arm64
>> > kpti control") to the stable 4.9, 4.14 and 4.19 kernels since they all
>> > support the command line parameter.
>>
>> Hey Florian,
>>
>> We don't normally take documentation patches into stable trees.
>
>Normally we do not, but this is simple enough I've queued it up for 4.19
>and 4.14. Are you sure it is ok for 4.9? If so, Florian, can you
>provide a backported version of it?
My objection to taking documentation patches is either that we take all
of them, or we take none. If we take only select documentation fixes it
makes a frankenstein Documentation/ directory that might cause more harm
than benefit.
Let's say I'm looking for netfilter documentation on 4.19, can I trust
linux-4.19.y or do I look upstream? Right now I know I have to look
upstream, but if we tell people it's okay to trust the linux-4.19.y docs
then we might be causing harm to our users when some fixes were
backported but corresponding documentation fixes weren't.
--
Thanks,
Sasha
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread* Re: Request to backport "Documentation: Document arm64 kpti control"
@ 2020-01-29 19:16 ` Sasha Levin
0 siblings, 0 replies; 12+ messages in thread
From: Sasha Levin @ 2020-01-29 19:16 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Greg Kroah-Hartman
Cc: moderated list:ARM/FREESCALE IMX / MXC ARM ARCHITECTURE,
Florian Fainelli, stable, Jeremy Linton
On Mon, Jan 27, 2020 at 04:51:06PM +0100, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
>On Sun, Jan 26, 2020 at 08:52:33AM -0500, Sasha Levin wrote:
>> On Sat, Jan 25, 2020 at 08:03:25PM -0800, Florian Fainelli wrote:
>> > Hi Greg, Sasha,
>> >
>> > Could you backport upstream commit
>> > de19055564c8f8f9d366f8db3395836da0b2176c ("Documentation: Document arm64
>> > kpti control") to the stable 4.9, 4.14 and 4.19 kernels since they all
>> > support the command line parameter.
>>
>> Hey Florian,
>>
>> We don't normally take documentation patches into stable trees.
>
>Normally we do not, but this is simple enough I've queued it up for 4.19
>and 4.14. Are you sure it is ok for 4.9? If so, Florian, can you
>provide a backported version of it?
My objection to taking documentation patches is either that we take all
of them, or we take none. If we take only select documentation fixes it
makes a frankenstein Documentation/ directory that might cause more harm
than benefit.
Let's say I'm looking for netfilter documentation on 4.19, can I trust
linux-4.19.y or do I look upstream? Right now I know I have to look
upstream, but if we tell people it's okay to trust the linux-4.19.y docs
then we might be causing harm to our users when some fixes were
backported but corresponding documentation fixes weren't.
--
Thanks,
Sasha
_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread* Re: Request to backport "Documentation: Document arm64 kpti control"
2020-01-29 19:16 ` Sasha Levin
@ 2020-01-31 3:33 ` Florian Fainelli
-1 siblings, 0 replies; 12+ messages in thread
From: Florian Fainelli @ 2020-01-31 3:33 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Sasha Levin, Greg Kroah-Hartman
Cc: Jeremy Linton, stable,
moderated list:ARM/FREESCALE IMX / MXC ARM ARCHITECTURE
On 1/29/2020 11:16 AM, Sasha Levin wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 27, 2020 at 04:51:06PM +0100, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
>> On Sun, Jan 26, 2020 at 08:52:33AM -0500, Sasha Levin wrote:
>>> On Sat, Jan 25, 2020 at 08:03:25PM -0800, Florian Fainelli wrote:
>>> > Hi Greg, Sasha,
>>> >
>>> > Could you backport upstream commit
>>> > de19055564c8f8f9d366f8db3395836da0b2176c ("Documentation: Document
>>> arm64
>>> > kpti control") to the stable 4.9, 4.14 and 4.19 kernels since they all
>>> > support the command line parameter.
>>>
>>> Hey Florian,
>>>
>>> We don't normally take documentation patches into stable trees.
>>
>> Normally we do not, but this is simple enough I've queued it up for 4.19
>> and 4.14. Are you sure it is ok for 4.9? If so, Florian, can you
>> provide a backported version of it?
>
> My objection to taking documentation patches is either that we take all
> of them, or we take none. If we take only select documentation fixes it
> makes a frankenstein Documentation/ directory that might cause more harm
> than benefit.
>
> Let's say I'm looking for netfilter documentation on 4.19, can I trust
> linux-4.19.y or do I look upstream? Right now I know I have to look
> upstream, but if we tell people it's okay to trust the linux-4.19.y docs
> then we might be causing harm to our users when some fixes were
> backported but corresponding documentation fixes weren't.
For a high profile feature/parameter such as kpti it seems to me that
making sure that the documentation reflects what the code supports is a
good way to limit the amount of support requests. For other options, I
would agree with you that back porting them probably makes little sense.
--
Florian
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread* Re: Request to backport "Documentation: Document arm64 kpti control"
@ 2020-01-31 3:33 ` Florian Fainelli
0 siblings, 0 replies; 12+ messages in thread
From: Florian Fainelli @ 2020-01-31 3:33 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Sasha Levin, Greg Kroah-Hartman
Cc: moderated list:ARM/FREESCALE IMX / MXC ARM ARCHITECTURE, stable,
Jeremy Linton
On 1/29/2020 11:16 AM, Sasha Levin wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 27, 2020 at 04:51:06PM +0100, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
>> On Sun, Jan 26, 2020 at 08:52:33AM -0500, Sasha Levin wrote:
>>> On Sat, Jan 25, 2020 at 08:03:25PM -0800, Florian Fainelli wrote:
>>> > Hi Greg, Sasha,
>>> >
>>> > Could you backport upstream commit
>>> > de19055564c8f8f9d366f8db3395836da0b2176c ("Documentation: Document
>>> arm64
>>> > kpti control") to the stable 4.9, 4.14 and 4.19 kernels since they all
>>> > support the command line parameter.
>>>
>>> Hey Florian,
>>>
>>> We don't normally take documentation patches into stable trees.
>>
>> Normally we do not, but this is simple enough I've queued it up for 4.19
>> and 4.14. Are you sure it is ok for 4.9? If so, Florian, can you
>> provide a backported version of it?
>
> My objection to taking documentation patches is either that we take all
> of them, or we take none. If we take only select documentation fixes it
> makes a frankenstein Documentation/ directory that might cause more harm
> than benefit.
>
> Let's say I'm looking for netfilter documentation on 4.19, can I trust
> linux-4.19.y or do I look upstream? Right now I know I have to look
> upstream, but if we tell people it's okay to trust the linux-4.19.y docs
> then we might be causing harm to our users when some fixes were
> backported but corresponding documentation fixes weren't.
For a high profile feature/parameter such as kpti it seems to me that
making sure that the documentation reflects what the code supports is a
good way to limit the amount of support requests. For other options, I
would agree with you that back porting them probably makes little sense.
--
Florian
_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread