linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH net-next] r8152: add vendor/device ID pair for Microsoft Devkit

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: <4c48269962dafbb641d5b0c38ec5b7bf951f3b4d.camel@redhat.com>
Date:   Thu, 12 Jan 2023 12:39:01 +0100
From:   Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>
To:     Andre Przywara <andre.przywara@....com>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
Cc:     "David S . Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>, linux-usb@...r.kernel.org,
        netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] r8152: add vendor/device ID pair for Microsoft
 Devkit

On Thu, 2023-01-12 at 10:51 +0000, Andre Przywara wrote:
> On Wed, 11 Jan 2023 21:31:43 -0800 Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org> wrote:
> > Hm, we have a patch in net-next which reformats the entries:
> > ec51fbd1b8a2bca2948dede99c14ec63dc57ff6b
> > 
> > Would you like this ID to be also added in stable? We could just 
> > apply it to net, and deal with the conflict locally. But if you 
> > don't care about older kernels then better if you rebase.
> 
> Stable would be nice, but only to v6.1. I think I don't care
> about older kernels.
> So what about if I resend this one here, based on top of the reformat
> patch, with a:
> Cc: <stable@...r.kernel.org> # 6.1.x
> line in there, and then reply to the email that the automatic backport
> failed, with a tailored patch for v6.1?
> Alternatively I can send an explicit stable backport email once this one
> is merged.

Note that we can merge this kind of changes via the -net tree. No
repost will be needed. We can merge it as is on -net and you can follow
the option 2 from the stable kernel rules doc, with no repost nor
additional mangling for stable will be needed.

If you are ok with the above let me know.

Thanks,

Paolo