netdev - Re: [stable] [PATCH net-2.6/stable] tg3: Restrict phy ioctl access

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: <20110217000035.GB6296@kroah.com>
Date:	Wed, 16 Feb 2011 16:00:35 -0800
From:	Greg KH <greg@...ah.com>
To:	Matt Carlson <mcarlson@...adcom.com>
Cc:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
	"stable@...nel.org" <stable@...nel.org>,
	"netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [stable] [PATCH net-2.6/stable] tg3: Restrict phy ioctl access

On Wed, Feb 16, 2011 at 03:52:48PM -0800, Matt Carlson wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 16, 2011 at 03:11:03PM -0800, David Miller wrote:
> > From: "Matt Carlson" <mcarlson@...adcom.com>
> > Date: Wed, 16 Feb 2011 15:06:13 -0800
> > 
> > > On Wed, Feb 16, 2011 at 02:39:35PM -0800, Greg KH wrote:
> > >> On Tue, Feb 15, 2011 at 02:51:10PM -0800, Matt Carlson wrote:
> > >> > If management firmware is present and the device is down, the firmware
> > >> > will assume control of the phy.  If a phy access were allowed from the
> > >> > host, it will collide with firmware phy accesses, resulting in
> > >> > unpredictable behavior.  This patch fixes the problem by disallowing phy
> > >> > accesses during the problematic condition.
> > >> > 
> > >> > Upstream commit ID f746a3136a61ae535c5d0b49a9418fa21edc61b5
> > >> 
> > >> There is no such upstream git commit id in Linus's tree.  What am I
> > >> doing wrong here?
> > > 
> > > The commit is in Dave Miller's net-next-2.6 tree.
> > > 
> > 
> > If it wasn't appropriate for net-2.6, it absolutely it not appropriate
> > for -stable.
> 
> net-2.6 was the target tree for the patch.  The stable_kernel_rules.txt
> seemed to suggest that I could just CC stable@...nel.org with the
> commit ID, and Greg would pull it in as the process dictates.  If that
> isn't correct, what is the preferred way to expedite the integration of
> a patch?

Keep reading that file, it says to put the Cc: in the signed-off-by area
of the original patch.

Also, that file says the patch has to be in Linus's tree, otherwise
sending me a git commit id of some other tree isn't going to help at
all.

thanks,

greg k-h
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html