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: <aK24VgyXGeUtm-el@auntie>
Date: Tue, 26 Aug 2025 13:36:22 +0000
From: Brett A C Sheffield <bacs@...recast.net>
To: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
Cc: stable@...r.kernel.org, patches@...ts.linux.dev,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, torvalds@...ux-foundation.org,
	akpm@...ux-foundation.org, linux@...ck-us.net, 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, hargar@...rosoft.com, broonie@...nel.org,
	achill@...ill.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 6.6 000/587] 6.6.103-rc1 review

On 2025-08-26 12:42, Brett A C Sheffield wrote:
> Hi Greg,
> 
> On 2025-08-26 13:02, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> > This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 6.6.103 release.
> > There are 587 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 Thu, 28 Aug 2025 11:08:24 +0000.
> > Anything received after that time might be too late.
> 
> Quick query - should we be backporting a known regression, even if it is in
> mainline presently, or do we wait until the fix is applied to mainline and
> *then* backport both patches?
> 
> 9e30ecf23b1b ("net: ipv4: fix incorrect MTU in broadcast routes")
> 
> introduces a regression which breaks IPv4 broadcast, which stops WOL working
> (breaking my CI system), among other things:
> 
> https://lore.kernel.org/regressions/20250822165231.4353-4-bacs@librecast.net
> 
> This regression has *already* been backported to:
> 
> - 6.16.3
> - 6.12.43
> 
> so I guess we wait for a fix for these.
> 
> However, it is not yet present in the other stable kernels.  The new stable
> release candidates today would spread the breakage to:
> 
> - 6.6.y
> - 6.1.y
> - 5.15.y
> - 5.10.y

oops - and 5.4.y

My goodness there are a lot of stable trees to keep track of!


Brett
-- 

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ