netdev - Re: [PATCH net] cgroup: Fix sock_cgroup

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-Id: <20200710.144459.1317276747917429038.davem@davemloft.net>
Date:   Fri, 10 Jul 2020 14:44:59 -0700 (PDT)
From:   David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:     kuba@...nel.org
Cc:     xiyou.wangcong@...il.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        linux@...ck-us.net
Subject: Re: [PATCH net] cgroup: Fix sock_cgroup_data on big-endian.

From: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
Date: Fri, 10 Jul 2020 13:54:24 -0700

> On Fri, 10 Jul 2020 13:47:47 -0700 (PDT) David Miller wrote:
>> From: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
>> Date: Thu, 9 Jul 2020 17:03:20 -0700
>> 
>> > On Thu, 09 Jul 2020 16:32:35 -0700 (PDT) David Miller wrote:  
>> >> From: Cong Wang <xiyou.wangcong@...il.com>
>> >> 
>> >> In order for no_refcnt and is_data to be the lowest order two
>> >> bits in the 'val' we have to pad out the bitfield of the u8.
>> >> 
>> >> Fixes: ad0f75e5f57c ("cgroup: fix cgroup_sk_alloc() for sk_clone_lock()")
>> >> Reported-by: Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>
>> >> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@...emloft.net>  
>> > 
>> > FWIW Cong's listed in From: but there's no sign-off from him so the
>> > signoff checking script may get upset about this one.  
>> 
>> I wonder how I should handle that situation though?  I want to give
>> Cong credit for the change, and not take full credit for it myself.
> 
> Cong, would you mind responding with a Sign-off for the patch?

That's not useful for two reasons:

1) This commit is in my tree and the commit message is immutable.

2) I needed to apply this patch because I didn't have time to wait for
   a turn-around from Cong or anyone else.  That's the situation where
   I'm asking "what should I do in this situation?"  I don't have the
   luxury of waiting for the author to reply and add a signoff because
   I'm trying to get a pull request out to Linus with the fix or
   similar.

Is it more clear now? :-)