Hi Daniel,
On Mon, 17 May 2021 17:29:35 +0200 Daniel Vetter wrote:
>
> On Mon, May 10, 2021 at 9:30 AM Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, May 10, 2021 at 09:16:58AM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> > > > End result: not pulling it, unless somebody can explain to me in small
> > > > words wh
On Mon, May 10, 2021 at 9:30 AM Christoph Hellwig wrote:
>
> On Mon, May 10, 2021 at 09:16:58AM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> > > End result: not pulling it, unless somebody can explain to me in small
> > > words why I'm wrong and have the mental capacity of a damaged rodent.
> >
> > No rodents I
On 10/05/21 19:57, Sean Christopherson wrote:
+Paolo
On Mon, May 10, 2021, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
On Mon, May 10, 2021 at 04:55:39PM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote:
yeah vfio is still broken for the case I care about. I think there's
also some questions open still about whether kvm really uses
mm
On Mon, May 10, 2021 at 04:55:39PM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> yeah vfio is still broken for the case I care about. I think there's
> also some questions open still about whether kvm really uses
> mmu_notifier in all cases correctly,
IIRC kvm doesn't either.
> > Daniel I suppose we missed thi
On Mon, May 10, 2021 at 3:50 PM Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
>
> On Sat, May 08, 2021 at 09:46:41AM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>
> > I think follow_pfn() is ok for the actual "this is not a 'struct page'
> > backed area", and disabling that case is wrong even going forward.
>
> Every place we've audit
On Sat, May 08, 2021 at 09:46:41AM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> I think follow_pfn() is ok for the actual "this is not a 'struct page'
> backed area", and disabling that case is wrong even going forward.
Every place we've audited using follow_pfn() has been shown to have
some use-after-free bug
On Sat, May 8, 2021 at 6:47 PM Linus Torvalds
wrote:
>
> [ Daniel, please fix your broken email setup. You have this insane
> "Reply-to" list that just duplicates all the participants. Very
> broken, very annoying ]
>
> On Fri, May 7, 2021 at 8:53 AM Daniel Vetter wrote:
> >
> > So personally I t
[ Daniel, please fix your broken email setup. You have this insane
"Reply-to" list that just duplicates all the participants. Very
broken, very annoying ]
On Fri, May 7, 2021 at 8:53 AM Daniel Vetter wrote:
>
> So personally I think the entire thing should just be thrown out, it's all
> levels of
On Thu, May 06, 2021 at 03:30:45PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> [ You had a really odd Reply-to on this one ]
>
> On Mon, May 3, 2021 at 12:15 PM Daniel Vetter wrote:
> >
> > Anyway here's a small pull for you to ponder, now that the big ones are
> > all through.
>
> Well, _now_ I'm all caught
[ You had a really odd Reply-to on this one ]
On Mon, May 3, 2021 at 12:15 PM Daniel Vetter wrote:
>
> Anyway here's a small pull for you to ponder, now that the big ones are
> all through.
Well, _now_ I'm all caught up. Knock wood. Anyway, time to look at it:
> Follow-up to my pull from last m
Hi Linus,
It's still the same topic branch as last merge window, but the name isn't
fitting all that well anymore :-)
Anyway here's a small pull for you to ponder, now that the big ones are
all through. It's been in -next almost the entire cycle, I've only done
some non-code rebases due to the -r
11 matches
Mail list logo
