linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/2] lsm: Fix description of fs_context_parse

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:   Mon, 12 Dec 2022 15:19:50 -0500
From:   Paul Moore <paul@...l-moore.com>
To:     Roberto Sassu <roberto.sassu@...weicloud.com>
Cc:     corbet@....net, casey@...aufler-ca.com, omosnace@...hat.com,
        john.johansen@...onical.com, kpsingh@...nel.org,
        bpf@...r.kernel.org, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Roberto Sassu <roberto.sassu@...wei.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] lsm: Fix description of fs_context_parse_param

On Mon, Dec 12, 2022 at 3:34 AM Roberto Sassu
<roberto.sassu@...weicloud.com> wrote:
> On Fri, 2022-12-09 at 12:28 -0500, Paul Moore wrote:
> > On Fri, Dec 9, 2022 at 3:30 AM Roberto Sassu
> > <roberto.sassu@...weicloud.com> wrote:
> > > From: Roberto Sassu <roberto.sassu@...wei.com>
> > >
> > > The fs_context_parse_param hook already has a description, which seems the
> > > right one according to the code.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Roberto Sassu <roberto.sassu@...wei.com>
> > > ---
> > >  include/linux/lsm_hooks.h | 3 ---
> > >  1 file changed, 3 deletions(-)
> >
> > I just merged this into lsm/next with a 'Fixes' tag pointing at the
> > previous comment block commit, thanks Roberto.
>
> Thanks Paul. Didn't include it, as I thought it is part of the stable
> kernel process. I guess it is always fine to include it, and to not CC
> the stable kernel mailing list, when the patch does not meet the
> criteria.

To be clear, the 'Fixes' tag here was for the previous comment fix
patch which only exists in the lsm/next branch and not any released
kernel, adding a stable/CC to this patch wouldn't have done anything
except throw up a number of automatically generated merge conflicts as
the stable folks tried to merge just this patch.  The 'Fixes' tag is
simply a bit of administrative housekeeping to connect this patch back
to the original, problematic patch; it will largely go unnoticed
unless someone decides to cherry pick patches.

When in doubt it's okay to add a Fixes tag, but leave off the
stable/CC.  In fact I prefer if people leave off the stable/CC as I've
found it to often be misused IMO; I'd rather add it when merging the
patch into one of the stable branches.

-- 
paul-moore.com