linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] inet/connection_sock: prefer _THIS_IP_ to current_text

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]

Message-ID: <CAKwvOdkvk7wN_iypAa09xhju2-XE60Nn16QjAKzK4mZkEBfNBw@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Mon, 13 Aug 2018 14:10:08 -0700
From:   Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@...gle.com>
To:     "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>
Cc:     Nathan Chancellor <natechancellor@...il.com>,
        netdev@...r.kernel.org, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] inet/connection_sock: prefer _THIS_IP_ to current_text_addr

On Thu, Aug 2, 2018 at 3:17 PM David Miller <davem@...emloft.net> wrote:
>
> From: Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@...gle.com>
> Date: Thu, 2 Aug 2018 15:10:00 -0700
>
> > On Thu, Aug 2, 2018 at 2:42 PM David Miller <davem@...emloft.net> wrote:
> >>
> >> From: Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@...gle.com>
> >> Date: Wed,  1 Aug 2018 14:57:59 -0700
> >>
> >> > As part of the effort to reduce the code duplication between _THIS_IP_
> >> > and current_text_addr(), let's consolidate callers of
> >> > current_text_addr() to use _THIS_IP_.
> >> >
> >> > Signed-off-by: Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@...gle.com>
> >>
> >> I'll ACk this for now:
> >>
> >> Acked-by: David S. Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
> >
> > Thank you David.  Should you take it into the net tree, can you please add:
> >
> > Cc: stable@...r.kernel.org # 4.17, 4.14, 4.9, 4.4
> >
> > to the commit message? This will help us as Nathan stated previously
> > in this thread.
>
> Why in the world is this a stable candidate?  It doesn't fix a bug.
>
> My understanding is that you are trying to do a consolidation of code
> and clean things up so that only one interface is used.
>
> That means it should, at best, go to the net-next tree.

David,
Can you please pick this up for the net-next tree then?
-- 
Thanks,
~Nick Desaulniers