On 4 December 2015 at 02:58, Ben Hutchings <ben@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Wed, 2015-12-02 at 18:41 +0100, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
>> Hi Pavel,
>>
>> Thanks for getting to the bottom of this.
>>
>> On 1 December 2015 at 14:03, Pavel Fedin <p.fedin@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> > This function takes stage-II physical addresses (A.K.A. IPA), on input, not
>> > real physical addresses. This causes kvm_is_device_pfn() to return wrong
>> > values, depending on how much guest and host memory maps match. This
>> > results in completely broken KVM on some boards. The problem has been
>> > caught on Samsung proprietary hardware.
>> >
>> > Cc: stable@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> > Fixes: e6fab5442345 ("ARM/arm64: KVM: test properly for a PTE's uncachedness")
>> >
>>
>> That commit is not in a release yet, so no need for cc stable
> [...]
>
> But it is cc'd to stable, so unless it is going to be nacked at review
> stage, any subsequent fixes should also be cc'd.
>
Ah yes, thanks for pointing that out.
But please, don't cc your proposed patches straight to
stable@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx. I usually leave it up to the maintainer that
merges the patch to add the Cc: line to the commit log.
_______________________________________________
kvmarm mailing list
kvmarm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/kvmarm
