netdev - Re: [RFC PATCH V4 02/13] netback: add module unload function.

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: <1328253910.2480.41.camel@edumazet-laptop>
Date:	Fri, 03 Feb 2012 08:25:10 +0100
From:	Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
To:	Ian Campbell <Ian.Campbell@...rix.com>
Cc:	Paul Gortmaker <paul.gortmaker@...driver.com>,
	"Wei Liu (Intern)" <wei.liu2@...rix.com>,
	"netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
	"xen-devel@...ts.xensource.com" <xen-devel@...ts.xensource.com>,
	"konrad.wilk@...cle.com" <konrad.wilk@...cle.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH V4 02/13] netback: add module unload function.

Le vendredi 03 février 2012 à 06:38 +0000, Ian Campbell a écrit :
> On Thu, 2012-02-02 at 22:52 +0000, Paul Gortmaker wrote:
> > On Thu, Feb 2, 2012 at 3:50 PM, Ian Campbell <Ian.Campbell@...rix.com> wrote:
> > > On Thu, 2012-02-02 at 20:34 +0000, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> > 
> > [...]
> > 
> > >
> > > I don't think it is at all unreasonable to ask for bug fixes but in this
> > > case Wei's series is removing the code in question (which would also
> > > undoubtedly fix the bug).
> > >
> > > As it happens the fix turns out to be simple but if it were complex I
> > > would perhaps have disagreed more strongly about spending effort fixing
> > > code that is removed 2 patches later, although obviously that would have
> > > depended on the specifics of the fix in that case.
> > 
> > Lots of people are relying on git bisect.  If you introduce build failures
> > or known bugs into any point in history, you take away from the value
> > in git bisect.  Sure, it happens by accident, but it shouldn't ever be
> > done knowingly.
> 
> Sure. In this case the bug has been there since 2.6.39, it isn't
> introduced by this series.
> 

We are stuck right now with a bug introduced in 2.6.39, (IP redirects),
and because fix was done in 3.1, we are unable to provide a fix fo
stable 3.0 kernel.

Something that takes 15 minutes to fix now, can take several days of
work later.



--
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