Re: [PATCH 0/5] Slow Randomizing Boosts DoS v4.4.219 backport 0

Thomas Gleixner <[email protected]> Mon, 27 Apr 2020 21:47:11 +0200
Newsgroups org.kernel.lore.historical-speck
Message-ID <[email protected]>
Thomas Gleixner <[email protected]> writes:
> speck for mark gross <[email protected]> writes:
>> From: mark gross <[email protected]>
>> Subject: [PATCH 0/5] Slow Ranomizing Boosts DoS linux-4.4.y backport
>>
>> This is a backport of the backports done by Thomas for linux-4.14.y to
>> linux-4.4.y.
>>
>> The backport needed a backport of one additional dependency for
>> cpu_data-x86_mask getting renamed to x86_stepping.
>>
>> This was tested by the test engineer who tested the other SRBDS implementations
>> and it seems to work.
>>
>>
>> Jia Zhang (1):
>>   x86/cpu: Rename cpu_data.x86_mask to cpu_data.x86_stepping
>
> This one is missing and rightfully so. Maybe you get your mail setup for
> sending patches right some day in the future.
>
> This one has in the mail headers:
>
>   In-Reply-To: <[email protected]>
>   References: <[email protected]>
>   From: Jia Zhang <[email protected]>
>   Date: Mon, 1 Jan 2018 09:52:10 +0800
>
> While it's correct that the patch is from Jia and was written on Jan. 1
> 2018, neither the From: nor the Date: header in the mail are correct.
>
> That's commit b399151cb48db30ad1e0e93dd40d68c6d007b637 upstream. Do we
> really want to backport that thing to 4.4 or just live with the uglies
> of x86_cpuinfo::x86_mask ?

Fished it out from the moderator mail, applied it to 4.4.y and then ran:

# git grep 'x86_mask'
arch/x86/kernel/cpu/amd.c:      if (c->x86_model <= 1 && c->x86_mask <= 1)

I clearly can see how that was tested.

Thanks,

        tglx