linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/2] l2tp: ensure sessions are freed after their PPPOL2TP socket

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: <20200403070301.GA16361@willie-the-truck>
Date:   Fri, 3 Apr 2020 08:03:02 +0100
From:   Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>
To:     David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Cc:     gregkh@...uxfoundation.org, stable@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, kernel-team@...roid.com,
        g.nault@...halink.fr
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] l2tp: ensure sessions are freed after their PPPOL2TP
 socket

On Thu, Apr 02, 2020 at 12:59:30PM -0700, David Miller wrote:
> Sorry, you will have to repost all of these l2tp patches with proper
> cover letters for a patch series.
> 
> In this particular case it's even more necessary, you posted two patch
> series.  One with 2 patches and one with 8 patches.  Do they depend
> upon eachother?  If so, which one goes first.  What is each patch
> series doing?  How is it doing it?  And why are you doing it that way?
> 
> Those are the questions answered by a properly written header posting.

Sorry, David. These two series are just backports for stable of patches
that are already in mainline. Git added you to CC because of your SoB
on the patches, but I don't think there's anything for you to do.

The 2-patch series is for 4.9-stable kernels.
The 8-patch series is for 4.4-stable kernels, and it's bigger because
there are missing dependencies in 4.4-stable.

I did call this out in the cover letters but, of course, you weren't CC'd
on those. Duh. Anyway, sorry again for the noise.

Will