Date: Wed, 25 Feb 2015 11:29:32 +0100
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
To: Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@de.ibm.com>
Cc: Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
        Raghavendra K T <raghavendra.kt@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
        tglx@linutronix.de, mingo@redhat.com, hpa@zytor.com,
        torvalds@linux-foundation.org, konrad.wilk@oracle.com,
        pbonzini@redhat.com, peterz@infradead.org, paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com,
        waiman.long@hp.com, davej@redhat.com, oleg@redhat.com, x86@kernel.org,
        jeremy@goop.org, paul.gortmaker@windriver.com, ak@linux.intel.com,
        jasowang@redhat.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org,
        virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org,
        xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org, riel@redhat.com,
        akpm@linux-foundation.org, a.ryabinin@samsung.com,
        sasha.levin@oracle.com, dave@stgolabs.net, stable@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH for stable] x86/spinlocks/paravirt: Fix memory corruption
 on unlock
Message-ID: <20150225102932.GA554@gmail.com>
References: <1424769899-14158-1-git-send-email-raghavendra.kt@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
 <20150224141731.GA16033@kroah.com>
 <20150224144737.GA26074@gmail.com>
 <54ECC0A1.1080802@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
 <20150224183844.GA8654@kroah.com>
 <20150225100806.GA7134@gmail.com>
 <54EDA08E.5080901@de.ibm.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <54EDA08E.5080901@de.ibm.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1517
Lines: 45


* Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@de.ibm.com> wrote:

> > By all means!
> > 
> > You'll first need to cherry-pick these commits:
> 
> >  927609d622a3 kernel: tighten rules for ACCESS ONCE
> >  c5b19946eb76 kernel: Fix sparse warning for ACCESS_ONCE
> >  dd36929720f4 kernel: make READ_ONCE() valid on const arguments
> 
> If you go before 3.19, you will also need
> 
>    230fa253df63 kernel: Provide READ_ONCE and ASSIGN_ONCE
>    43239cbe79fc kernel: Change ASSIGN_ONCE(val, x) to WRITE_ONCE(x, val)

The affected spinlock code went over several iterations 
post v3.18, which I think makes the spinlock change too 
risky and complex to backport so far back. So it's not 
necessay to backport these READ_ONCE() changes.

> > That's the minimum set you will need for backporting, 
> > due to overlapping changes to the ACCESS_ONCE() 
> > definition.
> > 
> > and then apply this commit:
> > 
> >  d6abfdb20223 x86/spinlocks/paravirt: Fix memory corruption on unlock
> 
> the alternative might be to replace READ_ONCE with 
> ACCESS_ONCE when doing the backport.

Doing changes to patches when doing a backport is a big 
no-no IMHO. Either there is a clean sequence of upstream 
commit IDs to cherry-pick, or it should not be backported 
in most cases.

Thanks,

	Ingo
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/