On 02/04/2024 3:26 pm, Jan Beulich wrote: > On 27.03.2024 13:33, Andrew Cooper wrote: >> 1) livepatching of .rodata: >> >> 989556c6f8ca - xen/virtual-region: Rename the start/end fields >> ef969144a425 - xen/virtual-region: Include rodata pointers >> b083b1c393dc - x86/livepatch: Relax permissions on rodata too >> >> And technically "x86/mm: fix detection of last L1 entry in >> modify_xen_mappings_lite()" too but you've already backported this one. >> >> Patching .rodata worked before Xen 4.17, and was broken (left as a TODO) >> when I adjusted Xen to stop using CR0.WP=0 for patching. >> >> >> 2) Policy fixes: >> >> e2d8a6522516 - x86/cpu-policy: Fix visibility of HTT/CMP_LEGACY in max >> policies >> >> This is a real bugfix for a real regression we found updating from Xen >> 4.13 -> 4.17. It has a dependency on >> >> 5420aa165dfa - x86/cpu-policy: Hide x2APIC from PV guests >> >> which I know you had more concern with. FWIW, I'm certain its a good >> fix, and should be backported. >> >> >> 3) Test fixes: >> >> 0263dc9069dd - tests/resource: Fix HVM guest in !SHADOW builds >> >> It's minor, but does make a difference for those of us who run these >> tests regularly. >> >> >> 4) Watchdog fixes: >> >> 9e18f339830c - x86/boot: Improve the boot watchdog determination of >> stuck cpus >> 131892e0dcc1 - x86/boot: Support the watchdog on newer AMD systems >> >> You took "x86/boot: Fix setup_apic_nmi_watchdog() to fail more cleanly" >> and the first of the two patches is in the same category IMO. The >> second I also feel ok to take for the in-support releases, particularly >> as all it is doing is dropping a family list. > I've pushed all of the above.
Thanks. > >> 5) Ucode scan stability (For 4.18 only) >> >> Xen 4.18 had "x86/ucode: Refresh raw CPU policy after microcode load" in >> it's .0 release, so should also gain: >> >> cf7fe8b72dea - x86/ucode: Fix stability of the raw CPU Policy rescan > This already is in 4.18.1, ... > >> I've only noticed because I've got them both backported to 4.17 in >> XenServer, but I don't think upstream wants to take that route. > ... while, as you suggest, not (and not intended to be) in 4.17. Oh, so it is. Although comparing my backport to what you put into 4.18, you also want 930605f155cc - x86/ucode: Remove accidentally introduced tabs which I apparently folded into my 4.17 backport. I have a feeling I noticed at the point of doing the backport. ~Andrew
