On Mon, Dec 12, 2022 at 05:04:24PM -0700, Alex Williamson wrote: > > > The decision to revert was based on the current interface being buggy, > > > abandoned, and re-implemented. It doesn't seem that there's much future > > > for the current interface, but Steve has stepped up to restrict the > > > current implementation to non-mdev devices, which resolves your concern > > > regarding unlimited user blocking of kernel threads afaict, and we'll > > > see what he does with locked memory. > > > > Except nobody has seen this yet, and it can't go into 6.2 at this > > point (see Linus's rather harsh remarks on late work for v6.2) > > We already outlined earlier in this thread the criteria that prompted > us to tag the revert for stable, which was Steve's primary objection in > the short term. I still don't understand this, everyone running a distro deals with the stuff. Even if you do blindly pull from a -stable branch instead of cherry picking you only have to do the revert-revert once. Git is good at this stuff. Plus I have a doubt after all the backporting required to get vfio to the required state that -stable patches are even going to work anyhow.. > I can't in good faith push forward with a revert, including stable, > if Steve is working on a proposal to resolve the issues prompting us > to accelerate the code removal. Depending on the scope of Steve's > proposal, I think we might be able to still consider this a fix for > v6.2. Thanks, Well, IMHO, you are better to send it for v6.2-rc1 than try to squeeze it into this merge window and risk Linus's wrath Jason
