netdev - Re: [PATCH v2 00/10] rt2x00: rt2x00: improve calling conventions for register accessors

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]

Date:   Fri, 19 May 2017 09:21:30 +0200
From:   Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
To:     Kalle Valo <kvalo@...eaurora.org>
Cc:     linux-wireless <linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org>,
        Stanislaw Gruszka <sgruszka@...hat.com>,
        David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Helmut Schaa <helmut.schaa@...glemail.com>,
        Daniel Golle <daniel@...rotopia.org>,
        Mathias Kresin <dev@...sin.me>,
        Johannes Berg <johannes.berg@...el.com>,
        Serge Vasilugin <vasilugin@...dex.ru>,
        Roman Yeryomin <roman@...em.lv>,
        Networking <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Jes Sorensen <jes.sorensen@...il.com>,
        Tom Psyborg <pozega.tomislav@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 00/10] rt2x00: rt2x00: improve calling conventions for
 register accessors

On Fri, May 19, 2017 at 9:15 AM, Kalle Valo <kvalo@...eaurora.org> wrote:
> Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de> writes:
>
>> On Fri, May 19, 2017 at 7:18 AM, Kalle Valo <kvalo@...eaurora.org> wrote:
>>> Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de> writes:
>>>
>>>> I've managed to split up my long patch into a series of reasonble
>>>> steps now.
>>>>
>>>> The first two are required to fix a regression from commit 41977e86c984
>>>> ("rt2x00: add support for MT7620"), the rest are just cleanups to
>>>> have a consistent state across all the register access functions.
>>>
>>> Can these all go to 4.13 or would you prefer me to push the first two
>>> 4.12? Or what?
>>
>> I think you can reasonably argue either way: the second patch does
>> fix a real bug that may or may not lead to an exploitable stack overflow
>> when CONFIG_KASAN is enabled, which would be a reason to put it
>> into 4.12. On the other hand, I have another 20 patches for similar
>> (or worse) stack overflow issues with KASAN that I'm hoping to all
>> get into 4.13 and backported into stable kernel later if necessary,
>> so we could treat this one like the others.
>>
>> The only difference between this and the others is that in rt2x00 it
>> is a regression against 4.11, while the others have all been present
>> for a long time.
>
> Having all of these in 4.12 sounds a bit excessive and splitting the set
> (the first two into 4.12 and the rest into 4.13) sounds too much work.
> So I would prefer to queue these to 4.13, if it's ok for everyone?

Ok, sounds fine. Thanks,

      Arnd