On Thu, Sep 15, 2016 at 11:52:43PM +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> [fix for patches applied in the wrong order to 4.1.y and 4.4.y
> ---
> the change is part of 70e4da7a8ff62f2775337b705f45c804bb450454, which
> is already in stable kernels 4.1.y to 4.4.y. this part of the fix
> however was later undone, so remove the line again]
>
> The following patches were applied in the wrong order in -stable. This
> is the order as they appear in Linus' tree,
>
> [0] commit 4e422bdd2f84 ("KVM: x86: fix missed hardware breakpoints")
> [1] commit 172b2386ed16 ("KVM: x86: fix missed hardware breakpoints")
> [2] commit 70e4da7a8ff6 ("KVM: x86: fix root cause for missed hardware breakpoints")
>
> but this is the order for linux-4.4.y
>
> [1] commit fc90441e728a ("KVM: x86: fix missed hardware breakpoints")
> [2] commit 25e8618619a5 ("KVM: x86: fix root cause for missed hardware breakpoints")
> [0] commit 0f6e5e26e68f ("KVM: x86: fix missed hardware breakpoints")
>
> The upshot is that KVM_DEBUGREG_RELOAD is always set when returning
> from kvm_arch_vcpu_load() in stable, but not in Linus' tree.
>
> This happened because [0] and [1] are the same patch. [0] and [1] come from two
> different merges, and the later merge is trivially resolved; when [2]
> is applied it reverts both of them. Instead, when using the [1][2][0]
> order, patches applies normally but "KVM: x86: fix missed hardware
> breakpoints" is present in the final tree.
>
> Cc: stable kernels <stable@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> # 4.1, 4.4
> Reported-by: Matt Fleming <matt@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Signed-off-by: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@xxxxxxxxxx>
Hey Paolo,
Could you please confirm it's indeed a problem in 4.1? The current 4.1 tree seems to be "correct" (the current code doesn't have the line that this patch deletes).
--
Thanks,
Sasha--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe stable" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html