linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 5.10 125/135] drm/i915: avoid uninitialised var in eb

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] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <YROARN2fMPzhFMNg@kroah.com>
Date:   Wed, 11 Aug 2021 09:46:12 +0200
From:   Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To:     Pavel Machek <pavel@...x.de>
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, stable@...r.kernel.org,
        jason@...kstrand.net, Jonathan Gray <jsg@....id.au>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5.10 125/135] drm/i915: avoid uninitialised var in
 eb_parse()

On Wed, Aug 11, 2021 at 09:28:43AM +0200, Pavel Machek wrote:
> Hi!
> 
> > From: Jonathan Gray <jsg@....id.au>
> > 
> > The backport of c9d9fdbc108af8915d3f497bbdf3898bf8f321b8 to 5.10 in
> > 6976f3cf34a1a8b791c048bbaa411ebfe48666b1 removed more than it should
> > have leading to 'batch' being used uninitialised.  The 5.13 backport and
> > the mainline commit did not remove the portion this patch adds back.
> 
> This patch has no upstream equivalent, right?
> 
> Which is okay -- it explains it in plain english, but it shows that
> scripts should not simply search for anything that looks like SHA and
> treat it as upsteam commit it.

Sounds like you have a broken script if you do it that way.

good luck!

greg k-h