linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH for 4.9 01/39] net: core: Prevent from dereferencing null pointer when releasing SKB

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20170918143120.rnrh2ghjpfy65hmx@sasha-lappy>
Date:   Mon, 18 Sep 2017 14:31:22 +0000
From:   "Levin, Alexander (Sasha Levin)" <alexander.levin@...izon.com>
To:     Greg KH <greg@...ah.com>
CC:     "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "stable@...r.kernel.org" <stable@...r.kernel.org>,
        Myungho Jung <mhjungk@...il.com>,
        "David S . Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH for 4.9 01/39] net: core: Prevent from dereferencing null
 pointer when releasing SKB

On Mon, Sep 18, 2017 at 10:13:21AM -0400, Sasha Levin wrote:
>On Mon, Sep 18, 2017 at 08:41:02AM +0200, Greg KH wrote:
>>On Mon, Sep 18, 2017 at 12:19:36AM +0000, Levin, Alexander (Sasha Levin) wrote:
>>>From: Myungho Jung <mhjungk@...il.com>
>>>
>>>[ Upstream commit 9899886d5e8ec5b343b1efe44f185a0e68dc6454 ]
>>>
>>>Added NULL check to make __dev_kfree_skb_irq consistent with kfree
>>>family of functions.
>>>
>>>Link: https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__bugzilla.kernel.org_show-5Fbug.cgi-3Fid-3D195289&d=DwIBAg&c=udBTRvFvXC5Dhqg7UHpJlPps3mZ3LRxpb6__0PomBTQ&r=bUtaaC9mlBij4OjEG_D-KPul_335azYzfC4Rjgomobo&m=iXzciSQOaZF7sggj-m_1eQCbmqf43dsIy8ogFRdIvSE&s=kZBpt2uE3l0TtR50y0QmqJyb1Wp3A-FB-GVfkwnTgVI&e=
>>>
>>>Signed-off-by: Myungho Jung <mhjungk@...il.com>
>>>Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
>>>Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <alexander.levin@...izon.com>
>>
>>Is this a different series from your original XX/59 patch series that
>>you feel is ready to go into the stable tree, or are you still asking
>>for review for these before they get submitted?
>
>This is a different series. Figured I'd do 2-3 in parallel to speed up things.

Sorry, just to clarify, I'm waiting for reviews on this one.

I'll improve the patch subject prefix next time to clearify that.

-- 

Thanks,
Sasha