linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] Revert "net: fix NULL pointer reference in cipso_v4_doi

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]

Date:   Thu, 2 Sep 2021 22:15:42 -0400
From:   Paul Moore <paul@...l-moore.com>
To:     王贇 <yun.wang@...ux.alibaba.com>
Cc:     "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Hideaki YOSHIFUJI <yoshfuji@...ux-ipv6.org>,
        David Ahern <dsahern@...nel.org>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Revert "net: fix NULL pointer reference in cipso_v4_doi_free"

On Wed, Sep 1, 2021 at 10:37 PM 王贇 <yun.wang@...ux.alibaba.com> wrote:
> On 2021/9/2 上午5:05, Paul Moore wrote:
> > On Tue, Aug 31, 2021 at 10:21 PM 王贇 <yun.wang@...ux.alibaba.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> Hi Paul, it confused me since it's the first time I face
> >> such situation, but I just realized what you're asking is
> >> actually this revert, correct?
> >
> > I believe DaveM already answered your question in the other thread,
> > but if you are still unsure about the patch let me know.
>
> I do failed to get the point :-(
>
> As I checked the:
>   https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/netdev/net.git
>
> both v1 and v2 are there with the same description and both code modification
> are applied.
>
> We want revert v1 but not in a revert patch style, then do you suggest
> send a normal patch to do the code revert?

It sounds like DaveM wants you to create a normal (not a revert) patch
that removes the v1 changes while leaving the v2 changes intact.  In
the patch description you can mention that v1 was merged as a mistake
and that v2 is the correct fix (provide commit IDs for each in your
commit description using the usual 12-char hash snippet followed by
the subject in parens-and-quotes).

-- 
paul moore
www.paul-moore.com