netdev - Re: [PATCH] net: ethernet: Fix memleak in ethoc

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:   Mon, 28 Dec 2020 16:14:17 -0500
From:   Konstantin Ryabitsev <konstantin@...uxfoundation.org>
To:     Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>
Cc:     Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>,
        Dinghao Liu <dinghao.liu@....edu.cn>, kjlu@....edu,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Jesse Brandeburg <jesse.brandeburg@...el.com>,
        Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] net: ethernet: Fix memleak in ethoc_probe

On Mon, Dec 28, 2020 at 01:05:26PM -0800, Florian Fainelli wrote:
> On 12/28/2020 12:23 PM, Konstantin Ryabitsev wrote:
> > On Thu, Dec 24, 2020 at 01:57:40PM -0800, Florian Fainelli wrote:
> >>>> Konstantin, would you be willing to mod the kernel.org instance of
> >>>> patchwork to populate Fixes tags in the generated mboxes?
> >>>
> >>> I'd really rather not -- we try not to diverge from project upstream if at all
> >>> possible, as this dramatically complicates upgrades.
> >>
> >> Well that is really unfortunate then because the Linux developer
> >> community settled on using the Fixes: tag for years now and having
> >> patchwork automatically append those tags would greatly help maintainers.
> > 
> > I agree -- but this is something that needs to be implemented upstream.
> > Picking up a one-off patch just for patchwork.kernel.org is not the right way
> > to go about this.
> 
> You should be able to tune this from the patchwork administrative
> interface and add new tags there, would not that be acceptable?

Oh, oops, I got confused by the mention of a rejected upstream patch -- I
didn't realize that this is already possible with a configuration setting.

Sure, I added a match for ^Fixes: -- let me know if it's not doing the right
thing.

-K