linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH AUTOSEL 5.4 002/205] drm/panfrost: Add missing check for pfdev->regulator

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: <20200118081845.GF19765@kadam>
Date:   Sat, 18 Jan 2020 11:18:45 +0300
From:   Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...cle.com>
To:     Greg KH <greg@...ah.com>
Cc:     Steven Price <steven.price@....com>,
        Sasha Levin <sashal@...nel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "stable@...r.kernel.org" <stable@...r.kernel.org>,
        Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>,
        "dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org" <dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH AUTOSEL 5.4 002/205] drm/panfrost: Add missing check for
 pfdev->regulator

On Fri, Jan 17, 2020 at 05:59:09PM +0100, Greg KH wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 17, 2020 at 04:12:27PM +0000, Steven Price wrote:
> > On Thu, Jan 16, 2020 at 04:39:37PM +0000, Sasha Levin wrote:
> > > From: Steven Price <steven.price@....com>
> > > 
> > > [ Upstream commit 52282163dfa651849e905886845bcf6850dd83c2 ]
> > 
> > This commit is effectively already in 5.4. Confusingly there were two
> > versions of this upstream:
> > 
> > 52282163dfa6 ("drm/panfrost: Add missing check for pfdev->regulator")
> > c90f30812a79 ("drm/panfrost: Add missing check for pfdev->regulator")
> > 
> > It got merged both through a -fixes branch and through the normal merge
> > window. The two copies caused a bad merge in mainline and this was
> > effectively reverted in commit 603e398a3db2 ("drm/panfrost: Remove NULL
> > check for regulator").
> > 
> > c90f30812a79 is included in v5.4 so should already be in any v5.4.y
> > release.
> 
> Have I mentioned this month just how much I hate the way the DRM tree
> handles stable patches like this?  This kind of fallout is a pain for
> stable maintainers, I dred every time I see a drm patch tagged for
> stable.
> 
> But we've been over this all before :(

Another example is:

29cd13cfd762 ("drm/v3d: Fix memory leak in v3d_submit_cl_ioctl")
0d352a3a8a1f ("drm/v3d: don't leak bin job if v3d_job_init fails.")

Two fixes for a memory leak were merged so now it's a double free.  I
sent a patch on Jan 10 but no one responded.

regards,
dan carpenter