linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 5.10 00/19] 5.10.171-rc1 review

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: <8e32bdd6-652f-f7db-15a0-9647f74275a1@roeck-us.net>
Date:   Wed, 1 Mar 2023 21:03:51 -0800
From:   Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>
To:     Slade Watkins <srw@...dewatkins.net>, Pavel Machek <pavel@...x.de>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
Cc:     kuniyu@...zon.com, stable@...r.kernel.org, patches@...ts.linux.dev,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, torvalds@...ux-foundation.org,
        akpm@...ux-foundation.org, shuah@...nel.org, patches@...nelci.org,
        lkft-triage@...ts.linaro.org, jonathanh@...dia.com,
        f.fainelli@...il.com, sudipm.mukherjee@...il.com, rwarsow@....de
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5.10 00/19] 5.10.171-rc1 review

On 3/1/23 14:09, Slade Watkins wrote:
> On 3/1/23 17:03, Pavel Machek wrote:
>> Hi!
>>
>>> This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 5.10.171 release.
>>> There are 19 patches in this series, all will be posted as a response
>>> to this one.  If anyone has any issues with these being applied, please
>>> let me know.
>>
>> AFAICT we should not need this patch -- we don't have b5fc29233d28 in
>> 5.10, so the assertion seems to be at the correct place here.
> 
> This (b5fc29233d28be7a3322848ebe73ac327559cdb9) appears to be in linux-5.10.y,
> though?
> https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/stable/linux.git/commit/?h=linux-5.10.y&id=b5fc29233d28be7a3322848ebe73ac327559cdb9
> 
> Confused,
> -- Slade
> 

Also confused. My script tells me that it is _not_ in v5.10.y, and that it isn't
queued either.

Upstream commit b5fc29233d2 ("inet6: Remove inet6_destroy_sock() in sk->sk_prot->destroy().")
   Integrated in v6.2-rc1
   Not in 6.1.y
   Not in 5.15.y
   Not in 5.10.y
   Not in 5.4.y
   Not in 4.19.y
   Not in 4.14.y

and:

$ git describe --contains b5fc29233d28be7a3322848ebe73ac327559cdb9
v6.2-rc1~99^2~393^2~4

However, it looks like 62ec33b44e0 is queued everywhere.

Upstream commit 62ec33b44e0 ("net: Remove WARN_ON_ONCE(sk->sk_forward_alloc) from sk_stream_kill_queues().")
   Integrated in v6.2
   Expected to be fixed in 6.1.y with next stable release (sha 29d108dc216d)
   Expected to be fixed in 5.15.y with next stable release (sha 07c26a42efc3)
   Expected to be fixed in 5.10.y with next stable release (sha 3ecdc3798eb9)
   Expected to be fixed in 5.4.y with next stable release (sha a88c26a1210e)
   Expected to be fixed in 4.19.y with next stable release (sha 60b390c291e9)
   Expected to be fixed in 4.14.y with next stable release (sha b53a2b4858c2)

Guenter

>>
>>> Kuniyuki Iwashima <kuniyu@...zon.com>
>>>      net: Remove WARN_ON_ONCE(sk->sk_forward_alloc) from
>>>      sk_stream_kill_queues().
>>
>> CIP testing did not find any problems here:
>>                                                                                                          
>> https://gitlab.com/cip-project/cip-testing/linux-stable-rc-ci/-/tree/linux-5.10.y
>