[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20230222142507.hapqjfhswhlq42ay@skbuf>
Date: Wed, 22 Feb 2023 16:25:07 +0200
From: Vladimir Oltean <olteanv@...il.com>
To: Kurt Kanzenbach <kurt@...utronix.de>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
Sasha Levin <sashal@...nel.org>
Cc: Vladimir Oltean <vladimir.oltean@....com>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
Vinicius Costa Gomes <vinicius.gomes@...el.com>,
Jamal Hadi Salim <jhs@...atatu.com>,
Cong Wang <xiyou.wangcong@...il.com>,
Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
Voon Weifeng <weifeng.voon@...el.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@...utronix.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 net 2/2] net/sched: taprio: make qdisc_leaf() see the
per-netdev-queue pfifo child qdiscs
+Greg, Sasha.
Hi Kurt,
On Wed, Feb 22, 2023 at 03:03:04PM +0100, Kurt Kanzenbach wrote:
> This commit was backported to v5.15-LTS which results in NULL pointer
> dereferences e.g., when attaching an ETF child qdisc to taprio.
>
> From what I can see is, that the issue was reported back then and this
> commit was reverted [1]. However, the revert didn't make it into
> v5.15-LTS? Is there a reason for it? I'm testing 5.15.94-rt59 here.
>
> Thanks,
> Kurt
>
> [1] - https://lore.kernel.org/all/20221004220100.1650558-1-vladimir.oltean@nxp.com/
You are right; the patchwork-bot clearly says that the revert was
applied to net.git as commit af7b29b1deaa ("Revert "net/sched: taprio:
make qdisc_leaf() see the per-netdev-queue pfifo child qdiscs""), but
the revert never made it to stable.
OTOH, the original patch did make it to, and still is in, linux-stable.
I have backport notification emails of the original to 5.4, 5.10, 5.15, 5.19.
Greg, Sasha, can you please pick up and backport commit af7b29b1deaa
("Revert "net/sched: taprio: make qdisc_leaf() see the per-netdev-queue
pfifo child qdiscs"") to the currently maintained stable kernels?
Thanks.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists