On Tue, Dec 18, 2012 at 12:34:22PM -0500, Michael Contreras wrote: > On Tue, Dec 18, 2012 at 05:49:16PM +0100, Stefan Hajnoczi wrote: > > On Tue, Dec 18, 2012 at 5:20 PM, Michael Tokarev <m...@tls.msk.ru> wrote: > > > On 18.12.2012 17:44, Stefan Hajnoczi wrote: > > >> On Wed, Dec 05, 2012 at 01:31:30PM -0500, Michael Contreras wrote: > > >>> Discard packets longer than 16384 when !SBP to match the hardware > > >>> behavior. > > >>> > > >>> Signed-off-by: Michael Contreras <mich...@inetric.com> > > >>> --- > > >>> hw/e1000.c | 7 +++++-- > > >>> 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > > > > > It looks like another very good candidate for -stable (up to quite some > > > releases of qemu ago), together with the previous similar patch. > > > > Yes, it's good for -stable. > > > > Stefan > > Thanks guys. Any update on the CVE number? Seems the KVM qemu git tree > still has this vulnerability. Xen has the fix in their qemu unstable > git mirror, but hasn't applied it yet either.
Your original LPE patch went into QEMU 1.3. qemu-kvm.git is no longer relevant - it has been merged back into qemu.git and has therefore not been updated since October 11. Use qemu.git. Perhaps others can provide info on the CVE and Xen. Stefan
