linux-kernel - RE: [PATCH v3 6/9] tty: n_gsm: fix deadlock and link starvation in outgoing data path

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

Message-ID: <DB9PR10MB5881188AE33199085DAD1460E0B59@DB9PR10MB5881.EURPRD10.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM>
Date:   Thu, 23 Jun 2022 12:26:27 +0000
From:   "Starke, Daniel" <daniel.starke@...mens.com>
To:     Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
CC:     "linux-serial@...r.kernel.org" <linux-serial@...r.kernel.org>,
        "jirislaby@...nel.org" <jirislaby@...nel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH v3 6/9] tty: n_gsm: fix deadlock and link starvation in
 outgoing data path

> This is a bit huge for stable backports, especially given that a huge
> number of the previous stable backports have totally failed and no one
> has submitted new versions.
> 
> So why is this needed for stable?  Same for all of these in the series...

Given the fact that these are all bug fixes I assumed that these are also
relevant for backporting. Maybe only in the more recent stable releases
if there are issues with the merges.
I do not mind removing the stable kernel reference and keep these changes
only for mainline. So please let me know your preference.
Should I resubmit the patches without stable reference?

Best regards,
Daniel Starke