linux-kernel - Re: [v5.15 Regression] block: rename GENHD_FL_NO_PART_SCAN to GENHD_FL_NO

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: <2024040329-unstopped-spelling-64c8@gregkh>
Date: Wed, 3 Apr 2024 19:54:28 +0200
From: Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To: Joseph Salisbury <joseph.salisbury@...onical.com>
Cc: hch@....de, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-block@...r.kernel.org,
	axboe@...nel.dk, sashal@...nel.org, stable@...r.kernel.org,
	Francis Ginther <francis.ginther@...onical.com>
Subject: Re: [v5.15 Regression] block: rename GENHD_FL_NO_PART_SCAN to
 GENHD_FL_NO_PART

On Wed, Apr 03, 2024 at 01:50:09PM -0400, Joseph Salisbury wrote:
> Hi Christoph,
> 
> A kernel bug report was opened against Ubuntu [0].  This bug is a regression
> introduced in mainline version v5.17-rc1 and made it's way into v5.15 stable
> updates.
> 
> The following commit was identified as the cause of the regression in 5.15:
> 
> c6ce1c5dd327 ("block: rename GENHD_FL_NO_PART_SCAN to GENHD_FL_NO_PART")

How is renaming a define a "regression"?

> I was hoping to get your feedback, since you are the patch author. Is the
> best approach to revert this commit, since many third parties rely on the
> name being GENHD_FL_NO_PART_SCAN in kernel headers?

External kernel modules are never an issue.  Is this a userspace thing?

> Is there a specific need that you know of that requires this commit
> in the 5.15 and earlier stable kernels?

Yes.  And Christoph did not do the backport, so I doubt he cares :)

Again, what in-kernel issue is caused by this?

thanks,

greg k-h