linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] remoteproc: properly fix missing CONFIG_FW

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:	Wed, 06 Mar 2013 08:53:22 +0100
From:	Paul Bolle <pebolle@...cali.nl>
To:	Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
Cc:	Ohad Ben-Cohen <ohad@...ery.com>, stable <stable@...r.kernel.org>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] remoteproc: properly fix missing CONFIG_FW_LOADER
 configurations

On Wed, 2013-03-06 at 08:46 +0800, Greg KH wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 05, 2013 at 11:22:49PM +0100, Paul Bolle wrote:
> > 1) But actually thinking about this: that upstream commit did end up in
> > the (longterm) v3.4.y series. And my patch is also relevant for the
> > v3.8.y series.
> 
> As that patch was in the 3.5-rc7 release, how can it be relevant for
> 3.8, or anything greater than 3.5 at all?

I seem to have confused you. My patch fixes a bug caused by a commit
that shipped in final release v3.5 (and is also part the 3.4.y series,
because that commit got added to that stable series).

> > Can't this patch, that fixes an obviously bogus commit,
> > which was important enough for stable, be itself submitted with
> > CC:stable?
> 
> How can you expect me to apply something that is already in the tree?  :)

It's not (yet) in the tree but fixes something that is in the tree. 


Paul Bolle

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/