2014-12-01 17:22+0100, Paolo Bonzini: > On 27/11/2014 20:03, Radim Krčmář wrote: > > The interesting one is [3/4], which improves upon a previous CVE fix; > > we also handle logical destination wrapping in it, so [2/4] does the > > same for physical; and to make it nicer, [1/4] removes a condition. > > [4/4] makes our fast path return true when the message was handled. > > > > Radim Krčmář (4): > > KVM: x86: deliver phys lowest-prio > > KVM: x86: fix APIC physical destination wrapping > > KVM: x86: allow 256 logical x2APICs again > > KVM: x86: don't retry hopeless APIC delivery > > > > arch/x86/kvm/lapic.c | 20 +++++++++++--------- > > arch/x86/kvm/lapic.h | 2 -- > > 2 files changed, 11 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-) > > > > So the order should be 1/2/5/3/4, right? It would be safer, thank you. (And when I look at it now, [4/4] would be better as 1st.) -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
