linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 4.19 0/3] Backport handling -ESTALE policy update failure to 4.19

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]

Message-ID: <02723ce8-0ad4-7860-b76c-7d2b30710dcf@huawei.com>
Date:   Fri, 3 Feb 2023 09:10:13 +0800
From:   "Guozihua (Scott)" <guozihua@...wei.com>
To:     Sasha Levin <sashal@...nel.org>
CC:     <stable@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>, <zohar@...ux.ibm.com>,
        <paul@...l-moore.com>, <luhuaxin1@...wei.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4.19 0/3] Backport handling -ESTALE policy update failure
 to 4.19

On 2023/2/3 1:20, Sasha Levin wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 01, 2023 at 10:39:49AM +0800, GUO Zihua wrote:
>> This series backports patches in order to resolve the issue discussed
>> here:
>> https://lore.kernel.org/selinux/389334fe-6e12-96b2-6ce9-9f0e8fcb85bf@huawei.com/
>>
>> This required backporting the non-blocking LSM policy update mechanism
>> prerequisite patches.
> 
> Do we not need this on newer kernels? Why only 4.19?
> 
Hi Sasha.

The issue mentioned in this patch was fixed already in the newer kernel.
All three patches here are backports from mainline.

-- 
Best
GUO Zihua