[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20230323104445.qidusxeruimeawy6@wittgenstein>
Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2023 11:44:45 +0100
From: Christian Brauner <brauner@...nel.org>
To: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@...hat.com>
Cc: Mike Christie <michael.christie@...cle.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org, sgarzare@...hat.com,
jasowang@...hat.com, stefanha@...hat.com,
syzbot+6b27b2d2aba1c80cc13b@...kaller.appspotmail.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] vhost_task: Fix vhost_task_create return value
On Thu, Mar 23, 2023 at 03:37:19AM -0400, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 22, 2023 at 01:56:05PM -0500, Mike Christie wrote:
> > vhost_task_create is supposed to return the vhost_task or NULL on
> > failure. This fixes it to return the correct value when the allocation
> > of the struct fails.
> >
> > Fixes: 77feab3c4156 ("vhost_task: Allow vhost layer to use copy_process") # mainline only
> > Reported-by: syzbot+6b27b2d2aba1c80cc13b@...kaller.appspotmail.com
> > Signed-off-by: Mike Christie <michael.christie@...cle.com>
>
> Acked-by: Michael S. Tsirkin <mst@...hat.com>
>
> The affected patch is not upstream yet, right?
> I don't know if the tree in question allows rebases - linux-next
> does. So ideally it would be squashed to avoid issues during bisect.
> Still it's error path so I guess not a tragedy even without squashing.
I tend to not rebase once stuff has been in linux-next but I make
exceptions as long as it's before -rc4. For now I've put the patch on
top (see the other mail I sent) but if it's really important I can
squash it after the weekend (I'll be mostly afk until then.).
Powered by blists - more mailing lists