linux-kernel - Re: [External] : Re: CVE-2024-26920: tracing/trigger: Fix to return error if failed to alloc snapshot

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <1263c5636be781504b91809a98760001247d0346.camel@oracle.com>
Date: Fri, 19 Apr 2024 08:23:17 +0000
From: Siddh Raman Pant <siddh.raman.pant@...cle.com>
To: "gregkh@...uxfoundation.org" <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
CC: "cve@...nel.org" <cve@...nel.org>,
        "linux-cve-announce@...r.kernel.org"
	<linux-cve-announce@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org"
	<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [External] : Re: CVE-2024-26920: tracing/trigger: Fix to return
 error if failed to alloc snapshot

On Thu, Apr 18 2024 at 15:13:40 +0200, gregkh@...uxfoundation.org
wrote:
> > > Should we just take that patch instead?
> > 
> > The series in which the patch is posted is here:
> > [...]
> > 
> > Seems like some good tracing subsystem refactoring. So if I understand
> > Documentation/process/stable-kernel-rules.rst correctly, I would say we
> > should not.
> 
> So the documentation on the commit here is wrong (i.e. wrong Fixes:
> tag?)  If so, that needs to be said somewhere...

Yes, the Fixes tag seems to be wrong.

Thanks,
Siddh

Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (834 bytes)