linux-kernel - Re: [RFC net 1/2] netdev-genl: Hold rcu_read_lock in napi

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: <ZzQJUdjWDGqbm2QQ@LQ3V64L9R2>
Date: Tue, 12 Nov 2024 18:05:05 -0800
From: Joe Damato <jdamato@...tly.com>
To: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org, pabeni@...hat.com, edumazet@...gle.com,
	amritha.nambiar@...el.com, sridhar.samudrala@...el.com,
	mkarsten@...terloo.ca, stable@...r.kernel.org,
	"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
	Simon Horman <horms@...nel.org>,
	Mina Almasry <almasrymina@...gle.com>,
	open list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC net 1/2] netdev-genl: Hold rcu_read_lock in napi_get

On Tue, Nov 12, 2024 at 06:01:02PM -0800, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> On Tue, 12 Nov 2024 17:48:42 -0800 Joe Damato wrote:
> > Sorry for the noob question: should I break it up into two patches
> > with one CCing stable and the other not like I did for this RFC?
> > 
> > Patch 1 definitely "feels" like a fixes + CC stable
> > Patch 2 could be either net-next or a net + "fixes" without stable?
> 
> Oh, sorry, I didn't comment on that because that part is correct.
> The split is great, will make backporting easier.

OK, cool, that's what I figured. Thanks for the guidance; will
repost shortly.