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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-Id: <20110216.161025.59672084.davem@davemloft.net>
Date:	Wed, 16 Feb 2011 16:10:25 -0800 (PST)
From:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:	mcarlson@...adcom.com
Cc:	greg@...ah.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org, stable@...nel.org
Subject: Re: [stable] [PATCH net-2.6/stable] tg3: Restrict phy ioctl access

From: "Matt Carlson" <mcarlson@...adcom.com>
Date: Wed, 16 Feb 2011 15:52:48 -0800

> 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?

You are posting a commit ID for the net-next-2.6 tree, that's what triggered
my response.

Unless it also went into the net-2.6 tree (in which case you should
give Greg the net-2.6 commit ID, which is also what the commit ID must
be in Linus's tree right now), the change is not appropriate for
-stable submission.
--
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