Re: [Qemu-ppc] [qemu-s390x] [Qemu-devel] [PULL 0/8] x86 queue, 2018-01-17

[Cornelia Huck]

On Tue, 23 Jan 2018 10:59:39 +0100
Christian Borntraeger <address@hidden> wrote:

> On 01/23/2018 09:40 AM, Christian Ehrhardt wrote:
> > On Thu, Jan 18, 2018 at 2:51 PM, Peter Maydell <address@hidden> wrote:  
> >> On 18 January 2018 at 02:01, Eduardo Habkost <address@hidden> wrote:  
> >>> The following changes since commit 
> >>> 8e5dc9ba49743b46d955ec7dacb04e42ae7ada7c:
> >>>
> >>>   Merge remote-tracking branch 'remotes/rth/tags/pull-tcg-20180116' into 
> >>> staging (2018-01-16 17:36:39 +0000)
> >>>
> >>> are available in the Git repository at:
> >>>
> >>>   git://github.com/ehabkost/qemu.git tags/x86-pull-request
> >>>
> >>> for you to fetch changes up to 6cfbc54e8903a9bcc0346119949162d040c144c1:
> >>>
> >>>   i386: Add EPYC-IBPB CPU model (2018-01-17 23:54:39 -0200)
> >>>
> >>> ----------------------------------------------------------------
> >>> x86 queue, 2018-01-17
> >>>
> >>> Highlight: new CPU models that expose CPU features that guests
> >>> can use to mitigate CVE-2017-5715 (Spectre variant #2).
> >>>  
> >>
> >> Applied, thanks.
> >>
> >> -- PMM
> >>  
> > 
> > Hi,
> > I was kind of clinging to [1] so far and had the expectation that all
> > those would be wrapped up in 2.11.1 once ready.
> > I see that the s390x changes are targeted to qemu-stable (well to
> > admit I suggested so referring the article above).
> > So I'd expected to see this series to show up on qemu-stable as well
> > but haven't seen it so far.
> > 
> > Therefore I wanted to ask if there was a change of plans in that
> > regard or if it needs just a few days more to see (part of) this
> > series on qemu-stable and on its way into 2.11.1?
> > 
> > [1]: https://www.qemu.org/2018/01/04/spectre/  
> 
> Adding Michael,
> 
> Yes, I think it makes sense to have the guest enablement for the spectre 
> mitigations available in 2.11.1 for all architectures that provide it. 
> (this queue for x86, Connies pending S390 patches, whatever Power
> and arm will do).

Also note that we will need a headers update for 2.11.1.

> 
> Not sure about a 2.10.3?

I'm not sure how far back we want to do stable changes (the further
back, the more likely it is that the patches need some massaging).
Also, I'm still not quite sure what the intended consumers are for our
stable trees.