On Sun, Oct 13, 2024 at 10:54 PM Greg KH <gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Sun, Oct 13, 2024 at 10:17:48PM -0700, Jeff Xu wrote: > > Hi Greg, > > > > How are you? > > > > What is the process to backport Pedro's recent mseal fixes to 6.10 ? > > Please read: > https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/process/stable-kernel-rules.html > for how all of this works :) > > > Specifically those 5 commits: > > > > 67203f3f2a63d429272f0c80451e5fcc469fdb46 > > selftests/mm: add mseal test for no-discard madvise > > > > 4d1b3416659be70a2251b494e85e25978de06519 > > mm: move can_modify_vma to mm/vma.h > > > > 4a2dd02b09160ee43f96c759fafa7b56dfc33816 > > mm/mprotect: replace can_modify_mm with can_modify_vma > > > > 23c57d1fa2b9530e38f7964b4e457fed5a7a0ae8 > > mseal: replace can_modify_mm_madv with a vma variant > > > > f28bdd1b17ec187eaa34845814afaaff99832762 > > selftests/mm: add more mseal traversal tests > > > > There will be merge conflicts, I can backport them to 5.10 and test > > to help the backporting process. > > 5.10 or 6.10? > 6.10. > And why 6.10? If you look at the front page of kernel.org you will see > that 6.10 is now end-of-life, so why does that kernel matter to you > anymore? > OK, I didn't know that. Less work is nice :-) Thanks! -Jeff > > Those 5 fixes are needed for two reasons: maintain the consistency of > > mseal's semantics across releases, and for ease of backporting future > > fixes. > > Backporting more to 6.10? Again, it's end-of-life, who would be > backporting anything else? > > confused, > > greg k-h
