[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <875zkz6nwc.fsf@kamboji.qca.qualcomm.com>
Date: Tue, 08 Oct 2019 22:24:51 +0300
From: Kalle Valo <kvalo@...eaurora.org>
To: Johan Hovold <johan@...nel.org>
Cc: Amitkumar Karwar <amitkarwar@...il.com>,
Siva Rebbagondla <siva8118@...il.com>,
linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Denis Efremov <efremov@...ux.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] Revert "rsi: fix potential null dereference in rsi_probe()"
Johan Hovold <johan@...nel.org> writes:
> On Tue, Oct 08, 2019 at 06:56:37PM +0300, Kalle Valo wrote:
>> Kalle Valo <kvalo@...eaurora.org> writes:
>>
>> > Johan Hovold <johan@...nel.org> writes:
>> >
>> >> This reverts commit f170d44bc4ec2feae5f6206980e7ae7fbf0432a0.
>> >>
>> >> USB core will never call a USB-driver probe function with a NULL
>> >> device-id pointer.
>> >>
>> >> Reverting before removing the existing checks in order to document this
>> >> and prevent the offending commit from being "autoselected" for stable.
>> >>
>> >> Signed-off-by: Johan Hovold <johan@...nel.org>
>> >
>> > I'll queue these two to v5.4.
>>
>> Actually I'll take that back. Commit f170d44bc4ec is in -next so I have
>> to also queue these to -next.
>
> That's right. I'm assuming you don't rebase your branches, otherwise
> just dropping the offending patch might of course be an option instead
> of the revert.
Yeah, I don't rebase my trees so we have to do a revert.
--
https://wireless.wiki.kernel.org/en/developers/documentation/submittingpatches
Powered by blists - more mailing lists