linux-kernel - Re: Stable backport of cifs nlink workaround?

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, 25 Feb 2014 09:43:06 -0800
From:	Jeff Layton <jlayton@...hat.com>
To:	Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
Cc:	Sitsofe Wheeler <sitsofe@...oo.com>, stable@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Jim McDonough <jmcd@...ba.org>,
	David Disseldorp <ddiss@...ba.org>,
	Steve French <smfrench@...il.com>,
	Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>
Subject: Re: Stable backport of cifs nlink workaround?

On Tue, 25 Feb 2014 08:11:56 -0800
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org> wrote:

> On Tue, Feb 25, 2014 at 03:24:43PM +0000, Sitsofe Wheeler wrote:
> > Hi,
> > 
> > Is there any chance that 74d290da476f672ad756634d12aa707375d3564d
> > ([CIFS] Provide sane values for nlink) could be backported to the stable
> > 3.2 kernel?
> 
> Why just 3.2?  What's wrong with all of the other kernels before 3.12
> that do not have this patch in it?
> 
> thanks,
> 
> greg k-h

Yeah, you'd probably need to apply it to every stable kernel > 3.2 or
you'd technically have a regression. I've no real objection to putting
that fix in, but backporting to older kernels may not be trivial. There
have been other changes in this area over the years...

-- 
Jeff Layton <jlayton@...hat.com>
--
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/