From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtpout.efficios.com (smtpout.efficios.com [158.69.130.18]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 585EC298CB2 for ; Wed, 18 Feb 2026 16:52:33 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=158.69.130.18 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1771433554; cv=none; b=d1a3gG8OKECAB/puWwZJ7rmYcI2YFDD6U7T/dCSB4vmx2IrqEjJEf2Abv9iEZBq0xF0R/VR2e7Gw//QPVJf/JN47W8kBROJYNzkfSzBjhD768pulPhKxaSQqNBNV9nbWIAtw+RDYtE9XYDdyPwRElRmV2MHq0ydukJvOxzkIJho= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1771433554; c=relaxed/simple; bh=N7U1v5QpdC0iiX3u8JxvIKCG1k0Nxn+mq6US1vddCuU=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:Date:Message-Id:MIME-Version; b=Wf4NRB3xj7uT4kFfc9JWT8wM8C0Vxr1ATQt4+wptvWRTfm6RNFFdLeGXTB8xMPyi8aO67ECuNmIkTE0MifjssRj8W/j6qM66E7+NZEi4knJY1RCBMUs+Wu4ZmfDTL2s/Q5IPW9Pk8FCk6lchLT5feOWidu9+f7pUwnXmxrisENc= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=efficios.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=efficios.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=efficios.com header.i=@efficios.com header.b=XRrlF2Bp; arc=none smtp.client-ip=158.69.130.18 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=efficios.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=efficios.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=efficios.com header.i=@efficios.com header.b="XRrlF2Bp" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=efficios.com; s=smtpout1; t=1771433546; bh=ppfqmGYqSHqGl0CaeL1elddJdeHohlK7Cfk0AO2RkXo=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:Date:From; b=XRrlF2BpmezmIExsg3ylJBwZiz4QKnooZRmp74Of4E4Kwn/PnvQiNvRPcCQLe7cTH Ne6AIxZy2hyoWHQ2vZe0Kih9n5cWDIU/QRNaBcDT/gAkkTSq9mXehyTQNue+AIpvHA 6nnuc0Ti/uJv7kUEaWoZFLTi0KLQWqmp9Upd0wP6mlMGBiseuWybzSOHynz0Y9Odhh K5AWULpkmYk+4hfhlNN3CdlxhB1VlCq/riLAJj3bdNgtbiSDqk487a77Eoost4VgU7 VoioMRYChWQZg28sfM/PjUEexlZoN8uBU9+4EXtLvdec9FvYvWxg78f88I3lwpYrrY +XY/XDtdyofAQ== Received: from thinkos.internal.efficios.com (mtl.efficios.com [216.120.195.104]) by smtpout.efficios.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4fGMxk3jDgzFC8; Wed, 18 Feb 2026 11:52:26 -0500 (EST) From: Mathieu Desnoyers To: Peter Zijlstra Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Mathieu Desnoyers , Ingo Molnar , Thomas Gleixner , Carlos O'Donell , Florian Weimer , Michael Jeanson Subject: [PATCH v1 0/2] Last minute rseq fixes for 7.0 Date: Wed, 18 Feb 2026 11:52:12 -0500 Message-Id: <20260218165214.1164084-1-mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com> X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.39.5 Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Hi, Here are two last minute rseq fixes aiming at 7.0. The first is a clarification of a rseq registration comment to match the rseq_size range checks. The second ensures that the new scheduler slice extension field don't end up exposing a rseq feature size equal to the original rseq size, which would make life harder than it needs to be for userspace. Thanks, Mathieu CC: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) CC: Ingo Molnar CC: Thomas Gleixner CC: Carlos O'Donell CC: Florian Weimer CC: Michael Jeanson Mathieu Desnoyers (2): rseq: Clarify rseq registration rseq_size bound check comment rseq: slice ext: Ensure rseq feature size differs from original rseq size include/uapi/linux/rseq.h | 13 ++++++++++++- kernel/rseq.c | 5 +++-- 2 files changed, 15 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) -- 2.39.5