linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] bpf: decrease usercnt if bpf_map_new_fd() fails in bpf_map_get_fd_by

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Tue, 26 Feb 2019 17:24:50 +0100
From:   Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>
To:     zerons <sironhide0null@...il.com>, ast@...nel.org
Cc:     netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] bpf: decrease usercnt if bpf_map_new_fd() fails in
 bpf_map_get_fd_by_id()

On 02/26/2019 03:58 PM, zerons wrote:
> On 2/26/19 22:44, Daniel Borkmann wrote:
>> On 02/26/2019 03:15 PM, zerons wrote:
>>> [ Upstream commit c91951f15978f1a0c6b65f063d30f7ea7bc6fb42 ]
>>
>> Thanks for the fix! What do you mean by "upstream commit" above in this context?
> 
> This patch is based on that commit, I thought I should mention this.
> Sorry for the confusion.

Ah, no. Usually that line is placed into stable commits that are
cherry-picked to point to the original commit sha in the mainline
tree. In any case, I didn't find c91951f15978, hence my question.
Anyway, for normal patch submissions in future, please don't add
it into the log, we'll remove it this time.

Thanks,
Daniel