On Thu, Dec 14, 2017 at 09:40:27PM +0100, Greg KH wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 12, 2017 at 05:42:31PM +0100, Christoffer Dall wrote:
> > From: Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@xxxxxxx>
> >
> > Commit 64afe6e9eb4841f35317da4393de21a047a883b3 upstream.
> >
> > The current pending table parsing code assumes that we keep the
> > previous read of the pending bits, but keep that variable in
> > the current block, making sure it is discarded on each loop.
> >
> > We end-up using whatever is on the stack. Who knows, it might
> > just be the right thing...
> >
> > Fixes: 33d3bc9556a7d ("KVM: arm64: vgic-its: Read initial LPI pending table")
> > Cc: <stable@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> # 4.8
> > Reported-by: AKASHI Takahiro <takahiro.akashi@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > Reviewed-by: Christoffer Dall <christoffer.dall@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > Signed-off-by: Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@xxxxxxx>
> > Signed-off-by: Christoffer Dall <christoffer.dall@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> > virt/kvm/arm/vgic/vgic-its.c | 2 +-
> > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> All 4 backports queued up, many thanks for them.
Hm, no, I messed up. I'm totally confused by the emails you sent and
the "drop this" and "this is real" :)
Can you resend just the patches you want applied?
thanks,
greg k-h