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:   Fri, 3 Sep 2021 10:31:01 +0800
From:   王贇 <yun.wang@...ux.alibaba.com>
To:     Paul Moore <paul@...l-moore.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 2021/9/3 上午10:15, Paul Moore wrote:
[snip]
>> 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).

Thanks for the kindly explain, I've sent:
  [PATCH] net: remove the unnecessary check in cipso_v4_doi_free

Which actually revert the v1 and mentioned v2 fixed the root casue,
Would you please take a look see if that is helpful?

Regards,
Michael Wang

>