linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 5.10 000/286] 5.10.209-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: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date: Fri, 26 Jan 2024 09:51:34 -0800
From: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To: Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>
Cc: 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, pavel@...x.de, jonathanh@...dia.com,
	f.fainelli@...il.com, sudipm.mukherjee@...il.com,
	srw@...dewatkins.net, rwarsow@....de, conor@...nel.org,
	allen.lkml@...il.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5.10 000/286] 5.10.209-rc1 review

On Fri, Jan 26, 2024 at 08:46:42AM -0800, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> On 1/22/24 15:55, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> > This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 5.10.209 release.
> > There are 286 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.
> > 
> > Responses should be made by Wed, 24 Jan 2024 23:56:49 +0000.
> > Anything received after that time might be too late.
> > 
> [ ... ]
> 
> > zhenwei pi <pizhenwei@...edance.com>
> >      virtio-crypto: implement RSA algorithm
> > 
> 
> Curious: Why was this (and its subsequent fixes) backported to v5.10.y ?
> It is quite beyond a bug fix. Also, unless I am really missing something,
> the series (or at least this patch) was not applied to v5.15.y, so we now
> have functionality in v5.10.y which is not in v5.15.y.

See the commit text, it was a dependency of a later fix and documented
as such.

Having it in 5.10 and not 5.15 is a bit odd, I agree, so patches are
gladly accepted :)

thanks,

greg k-h