linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/2] Bluetooth: qca: fix NULL-deref on non-serdev setup

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]

Date: Mon, 22 Apr 2024 21:53:48 +0800
From: quic_zijuhu <quic_zijuhu@...cinc.com>
To: Johan Hovold <johan@...nel.org>
CC: Luiz Augusto von Dentz <luiz.dentz@...il.com>,
        Marcel Holtmann
	<marcel@...tmann.org>,
        Zhengping Jiang <jiangzp@...gle.com>,
        <linux-bluetooth@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] Bluetooth: qca: fix NULL-deref on non-serdev setup

On 4/22/2024 9:43 PM, Johan Hovold wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 22, 2024 at 09:30:28PM +0800, quic_zijuhu wrote:
>> On 4/22/2024 9:20 PM, Johan Hovold wrote:
>>> On Mon, Apr 22, 2024 at 09:04:58PM +0800, quic_zijuhu wrote:
>>>> On 4/22/2024 8:51 PM, Johan Hovold wrote:
>>>>> On Tue, Mar 19, 2024 at 04:46:09PM +0100, Johan Hovold wrote:
>>>
>>>>>> Johan Hovold (2):
>>>>>>   Bluetooth: qca: fix NULL-deref on non-serdev suspend
>>>>>>   Bluetooth: qca: fix NULL-deref on non-serdev setup
>>>>>
>>>>> Could you pick these up for 6.9 or 6.10?
>>>>>
>>>>> The patches are marked for stable backport and only privileged users can
>>>>> set the N_HCI line discipline these days (even if I'm not sure about
>>>>> pre-5.14 kernels...) so it may be fine to wait for 6.10 if you prefer.
>>>
>>>> could you share the patch links for me to review. i can
>>>> 't find them now
>>>
>>> Sure, but you should bookmark lore.kernel.org in your browser as you can
>>> search the archives there yourself:
>>>
>>> 	https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20240319154611.2492-1-johan+linaro@kernel.org/
> 
>> NAK for your [PATCH 1/2] since the null checking is redundant with your
>> [PATCH 2/2].
> 
> I explained in the cover letter why it is split up like this. If you
> don't bother reading, then we will not bother listening to you.
> 
>> NAK for your [PATCH 2/2], since it is same with my earlier fix
>> https://lore.kernel.org/all/1704960978-5437-1-git-send-email-quic_zijuhu@quicinc.com/
>> my new patchset for btattach tool still has this change.
> 
> The fix does not depend on your btattach series, which has also been
> rejected.
> 
these my v1 and v2 for this issue which are earlier then yours.
they are not rejected but not responded.

https://lore.kernel.org/all/bf74d533-c0ff-42c6-966f-b4b28c5e0f60@molgen.mpg.de/
https://lore.kernel.org/all/1704970181-30092-1-git-send-email-quic_zijuhu@quicinc.com/

> You clearly have some learning to do on how to interact with the kernel
> community and to write proper commit messages and patches. If you start
> listening to feedback and try not to piss everyone off perhaps you can
> even get your patches merged one day. [1][2]
> 
> Johan
> 
> [1] https://lore.kernel.org/linux-bluetooth/fbe5722b-1e45-4ccb-a050-20a473a823c8@quicinc.com/T/#m8e495666a71eb0e7ae54c82554dfff1fc96983e7
> [2] https://lore.kernel.org/linux-bluetooth/1713563327-19694-1-git-send-email-quic_zijuhu@quicinc.com/T/#med0610646a8fd8b3c8586abca9895b124b2d2534