Thanks Greg, Andy
How about c198b121b1a1d7a7171770c634cd49191bac4477? Will both patches go to stable kernel?
BR. Ning.
-----Original Message----- From: gregkh@linuxfoundation.org [mailto:gregkh@linuxfoundation.org] Sent: Tuesday, January 23, 2018 3:26 PM To: Andy Lutomirski luto@kernel.org Cc: Zhang, Ning A ning.a.zhang@intel.com; tglx@linutronix.de; stable@vger.kernel.org; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: backport Rewrite sync_core() to use IRET-to-self to stable kernels?
On Mon, Jan 22, 2018 at 07:06:29PM -0800, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
On Mon, Jan 22, 2018 at 6:59 PM, Zhang, Ning A ning.a.zhang@intel.com wrote:
hello, Greg, Andy, Thomas
would you like to backport these two patches to LTS kernel?
https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/stable/linux-stable. git/commit/arch/x86/include/asm/processor.h?h=v4.14.14&id=1c52d859cb 2d417e7216d3e56bb7fea88444cec9
x86/asm/32: Make sync_core() handle missing CPUID on all 32-bit kernels
https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/stable/linux-stable. git/commit/arch/x86/include/asm/processor.h?h=v4.14.14&id=c198b121b1 a1d7a7171770c634cd49191bac4477
x86/asm: Rewrite sync_core() to use IRET-to-self
I'd be in favor of backporting 1c52d859cb2d417e7216d3e56bb7fea88444cec9. I see no compelling reason to backport the other one, since it doesn't fix a bug. Greg, can you do this?
I'll work on this after this round of stable kernels are released.
thanks,
greg k-h