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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:   Wed, 19 Jun 2019 20:36:43 +0200
From:   Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To:     Raul Rangel <rrangel@...omium.org>
Cc:     stable@...r.kernel.org, linux-mmc@...r.kernel.org,
        djkurtz@...gle.com, adrian.hunter@...el.com, zwisler@...omium.org,
        Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Chris Boot <bootc@...tc.net>,
        Clément Péron <peron.clem@...il.com>,
        Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@...aro.org>
Subject: Re: [stable/4.14.y PATCH 0/3] mmc: Fix a potential resource leak
 when shutting down request queue.

On Wed, Jun 19, 2019 at 12:23:04PM -0600, Raul Rangel wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 19, 2019 at 07:09:17PM +0200, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> > On Wed, Jun 19, 2019 at 10:46:25AM -0600, Raul Rangel wrote:
> > > On Tue, May 14, 2019 at 11:19:34AM +0200, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> > > > On Mon, May 13, 2019 at 11:55:18AM -0600, Raul E Rangel wrote:
> > > > > I think we should cherry-pick 41e3efd07d5a02c80f503e29d755aa1bbb4245de
> > > > > https://lore.kernel.org/patchwork/patch/856512/ into 4.14. It fixes a
> > > > > potential resource leak when shutting down the request queue.
> > > > 
> > > > Potential meaning "it does happen", or "it can happen if we do this", or
> > > > just "maybe it might happen, we really do not know?"
> > > It does happen if the AMD SDHCI patches are cherry-picked into 4.14.
> > > https://lkml.org/lkml/2019/5/1/398
> > 
> > Why are those patches somehow being required to be added to 4.14.y?  If
> > they are not added, is all fine?
> I was just thinking we would backport the patches to fix this AMD SDHCI
> hardware bug, but I guess we don't need to.

Has anyone asked for those to be backported?  Does anyone require them
to be?  What's keeping users from using a newer kernel that have this
specific hardware issue?

Trying to apply patches to a stable kernel due to an issue that is not
even in that stable kernel is crazy.  No wonder I am totally confused...

thanks,

greg k-h

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ