[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20190919200726.GA252076@kroah.com>
Date: Thu, 19 Sep 2019 22:07:26 +0200
From: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To: Christoph Paasch <christoph.paasch@...il.com>
Cc: Sasha Levin <sashal@...nel.org>, stable@...r.kernel.org,
netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4.14-stable 0/2] Fixes to commit fdfc5c8594c2 (tcp:
remove empty skb from write queue in error cases)
On Thu, Sep 19, 2019 at 08:21:43AM -0700, Christoph Paasch wrote:
> Hello Greg & Sasha,
>
> On Sat, Sep 14, 2019 at 12:20 AM Christoph Paasch <cpaasch@...le.com> wrote:
> >
> >
> > The above referenced commit has problems on older non-rbTree kernels.
> >
> > AFAICS, the commit has only been backported to 4.14 up to now, but the
> > commit that fdfc5c8594c2 is fixing (namely ce5ec440994b ("tcp: ensure epoll
> > edge trigger wakeup when write queue is empty"), is in v4.2.
> >
> > Christoph Paasch (2):
> > tcp: Reset send_head when removing skb from write-queue
> > tcp: Don't dequeue SYN/FIN-segments from write-queue
>
> I'm checking in on these two patches for the 4.14 stable-queue.
> Especially the panic fixed by patch 2 is pretty easy to trigger :-/
Dude, it's been less than a week. And it's the middle of the merge
window. And it's the week after Plumbers and Maintainer's summit.
Relax...
I'll go queue these up now, but I am worried about them, given this
total mess the backports seem to have caused.
Why isn't this needed in 4.9.y and 4.4.y also?
thanks,
greg k-h
Powered by blists - more mailing lists