On Thu, Feb 08, 2018 at 06:42:03PM +0100, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > On 08/02/2018 18:14, Greg KH wrote: > > On Thu, Feb 08, 2018 at 03:49:59AM +0100, Greg KH wrote: > >> On Tue, Feb 06, 2018 at 09:05:46PM +0000, Woodhouse, David wrote: > >>> > >>> > >>> On Tue, 2018-02-06 at 19:01 +0100, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > >>>> On 06/02/2018 18:29, David Woodhouse wrote: > >>>>> I've put together a linux-4.9.y branch at > >>>>> http://git.infradead.org/retpoline-stable.git/shortlog/refs/heads/linux-4.9.y > >>>>> > >>>>> Most of it is fairly straightforward, apart from the IBPB on context > >>>>> switch for which Tim has already posted a candidate. I wanted some more > >>>>> review on my backports of the KVM bits though, including some extra > >>>>> historical patches I pulled in. > >>>> > >>>> Looks good! Thanks for the work, > >>>> > >>>> Paolo > >>> > >>> Thanks. In that case, Greg, the full set is lined up in > >>> http://git.infradead.org/retpoline-stable.git/shortlog/refs/heads/linux-4.9.y > >>> or git://git.infradead.org/retpoline-stable linux-4.9.y > >> > >> Many thanks for all of this work. I've now queued up all of these. > > > > There's a problem with the backport of 6342c50ad12e ("KVM: nVMX: > > vmx_complete_nested_posted_interrupt() can't fail") as there is still a > > check in the function that can fail: > > > > vapic_page = kmap(vmx->nested.virtual_apic_page); > > if (!vapic_page) { > > WARN_ON(1); > > return -ENOMEM; > > } > > > > Do we need something else before this patch in order to fix this? I > > guess kmap really can't fail, should I just drop the whole (!vapic_page) > > check? > > Yes, that would be commit 42cf014d38d8822cce63703a467e00f65d000952. > Should David or I respin? No need, I can sneak it into the middle of the series :) I'll do it later tonight and let you know if I have any problems, thanks for pointing out the needed commit. greg k-h