Am 25.02.2015 um 11:08 schrieb Ingo Molnar: > > * Greg KH <gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >>>> It's: >>>> >>>> d6abfdb20223 x86/spinlocks/paravirt: Fix memory corruption on unlock >>> >>> Yes, This is the original patch. Please note I have taken out the >>> READ_ONCE changes from the original patch to avoid build warnings >>> mentioned below. >>> (Those READ_ONCE changes were cosmetic and was not present in the >>> previous versions) >>> >>>> >>>> You'll also need this fix from Linus to avoid (harmless) >>>> build warnings: >>>> >>>> dd36929720f4 kernel: make READ_ONCE() valid on const arguments >>> >>> So this may not be absolutely necessary with the current patch. >> >> I'd prefer to be as close as possible to the upstream >> patch. So if applying both of these patches will work, >> I'd much rather do that. Changing patches when >> backporting them to stable for no good reason than to >> clean things up, just confuses everyone involved. >> >> Let's keep our messy history :) > > By all means! > > You'll first need to cherry-pick these commits: > > 927609d622a3 kernel: tighten rules for ACCESS ONCE > c5b19946eb76 kernel: Fix sparse warning for ACCESS_ONCE > dd36929720f4 kernel: make READ_ONCE() valid on const arguments If you go before 3.19, you will also need 230fa253df63 kernel: Provide READ_ONCE and ASSIGN_ONCE 43239cbe79fc kernel: Change ASSIGN_ONCE(val, x) to WRITE_ONCE(x, val) > > That's the minimum set you will need for backporting, due > to overlapping changes to the ACCESS_ONCE() definition. > > and then apply this commit: > > d6abfdb20223 x86/spinlocks/paravirt: Fix memory corruption on unlock the alternative might be to replace READ_ONCE with ACCESS_ONCE when doing the backport. This depends on how important you consider backporting the ACCESS_ONCE fixes. Christian _______________________________________________ Virtualization mailing list Virtualization@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/virtualization
