Hi Ben,

sorry for delay,

On 02/20, Ben Hutchings wrote:
>
> On Tue, 2013-02-19 at 20:35 +0100, Stefan Priebe wrote:
> > Am 19.02.2013 20:05, schrieb Ben Hutchings:
> > > On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 06:51:53AM -0800, Greg KH wrote:
> > >> On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 10:18:37AM +0100, Stefan Priebe - Profihost AG 
> > >> wrote:
> > >>> Hi,
> > >>>
> > >>> will we see a backport for the above fix for the 3.0.X tree?
> > >>
> > >> Is it applicable to the 3.0.x tree?  And if so, someone needs to
> > >> backport it, and provide it to me, can you?
> > >
> > > For 3.2.y I've cherry-picked (in this order):
> > >
> > > 848e8f5f0ad3169560c516fff6471be65f76e69f
> > > 95cf00fa5d5e2a200a2c044c84bde8389a237e02
> > > 910ffdb18a6408e14febbb6e4b6840fd2c928c82
> > > 9899d11f654474d2d54ea52ceaa2a1f4db3abd68
> > > 9067ac85d533651b98c2ff903182a20cbb361fcb
> > >
> > > The last three fix the more recently-discovered race.  The first two
> > > are a fix for an x86-specific race in ptrace, made by Oleg back in
> > > August.  The fourth at least textually depends on the first two.
> > >
> > > I'm not sure whether 3.0.y would need anything more.
> > at least on 3.0 this picking does not work as
> > 910ffdb18a6408e14febbb6e4b6840fd2c928c82
> >
> > does not apply. But backports of the last three are here:
> > http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/msg31694.html
>
> Oleg, could you comment on whether 'ptrace/x86: Partly fix
> set_task_blockstep()->update_debugctlmsr() logic' should be backported
> to 3.0.y as well?

No, I don't think -stable really needs this fix. The fix itself is fine
(I hope ;), but the bug is not serious.

You can apply 9899d11f654474d2d54ea52ceaa2a1f4db3abd68 without the comment
changes in arch/x86/kernel/step.c

Oleg.

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe stable" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Reply via email to