On Sun, Apr 22, 2018 at 07:03:44PM -0600, Michal Hocko wrote: > On Fri 20-04-18 15:14:07, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > > These fix a number of perf, x86 and sched cases where we have user > > controlled > > array dereferences. All were found by Dan's recent Smatch update. > > Do we want to mark all of these for stable?
If we all agree that any (speculative) user-controlled array index -- irrespective of the existence of the second load/store that would complete the gadget -- needs fixing and thus all these patches are 'good', then yes, that makes sense. Given yours is the only response so far, I suspect we're good on all that :-)
