From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932627AbdLOQHl (ORCPT ); Fri, 15 Dec 2017 11:07:41 -0500 Received: from mail-wm0-f66.google.com ([74.125.82.66]:34614 "EHLO mail-wm0-f66.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932359AbdLOQHk (ORCPT ); Fri, 15 Dec 2017 11:07:40 -0500 X-Google-Smtp-Source: ACJfBos5pfeqGwEcG2fk2Yosw26K/kbVXImRoIH69ieGUtQPUez5jccoVMEpZ+EHgDEbt1bOFR59hA== Date: Fri, 15 Dec 2017 17:07:35 +0100 From: Ingo Molnar To: Andy Lutomirski Cc: Linus Torvalds , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , Thomas Gleixner , "H. Peter Anvin" , Peter Zijlstra , Andrew Morton , Josh Poimboeuf , Borislav Petkov Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] x86 fixes Message-ID: <20171215160735.p47cymimxcezfds7@gmail.com> References: <20171215154308.ixj3wwvy2gajmtpn@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: NeoMutt/20170609 (1.8.3) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org * Andy Lutomirski wrote: > On Fri, Dec 15, 2017 at 7:43 AM, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > Linus, > > > > > - two 5-level paging related fixes > > Which reminds me: can you grab this one, too? > > https://lkml.kernel.org/r/24c898b4f44fdf8c22d93703850fb384ef87cfdc.1513035461.git.luto@kernel.org Yeah, done - it's now in x86/urgent as: c739f930be1d: x86/espfix/64: Fix espfix double-fault handling on 5-level systems Will push it out soon. Linus will get it with the next x86/urgent batch, as there's no production 5-level paging CPUs out there yet, right? I'm also picking up your pending PTI fixes/updates over the weekend, but I spent today mostly to make sure that the system call trampoline bits and its dependencies were robust in practice. Could you please have a good look at that tree: git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/tip/tip.git tmp.tmp This includes the preparatory merges and cherry-picks, and some other low risk preparatory bits related to PTI. Is this tree looking good to you standalone? Note that the lack of runtime patching on non-Intel systems by default is intentionally not included at this stage, so that it's all simpler, and that we get more test coverage... This tree is what I've been testing all day, including suspend/resume testing, and which I wanted to send to Linus later today as an RFC pull request, assuming there's no last minute showstoppers. (Right after I've seen the new Star Wars movie with my son - because priorities! ;-) Thanks, Ingo