netdev - Re: [PATCH stable-5.4 0/2] net: dsa: lantiq

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: <YHM9NX1AuNk6CCMn@sashalap>
Date:   Sun, 11 Apr 2021 14:17:25 -0400
From:   Sasha Levin <sashal@...nel.org>
To:     Martin Blumenstingl <martin.blumenstingl@...glemail.com>
Cc:     stable@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Hauke Mehrtens <hauke@...ke-m.de>,
        f.fainelli@...il.com, davem@...emloft.net
Subject: Re: [PATCH stable-5.4 0/2] net: dsa: lantiq_gswip: backports for
 Linux 5.4

On Sun, Apr 11, 2021 at 07:17:46PM +0200, Martin Blumenstingl wrote:
>Hi Sasha,
>
>On Sun, Apr 11, 2021 at 6:48 PM Sasha Levin <sashal@...nel.org> wrote:
>>
>> On Sun, Apr 11, 2021 at 12:23:42PM +0200, Martin Blumenstingl wrote:
>> >Hello,
>> >
>> >This backports two patches (which could not be backported automatically
>> >because the gswip_phylink_mac_link_up function is different in Linux 5.4
>> >compared to 5.7 and newer) for the lantiq_gswip driver:
>> >- commit 3e9005be87777afc902b9f5497495898202d335d upstream.
>> >- commit 4b5923249b8fa427943b50b8f35265176472be38 upstream.
>> >
>> >This is the first time that I am doing such a backport so I am not
>> >sure how to mention the required modifications. I added them at the
>> >bottom of each patch with another Signed-off-by. If this is not correct
>> >then please suggest how I can do it rights.
>>
>> Hey Martin,
>>
>> Your backport works, but I'd rather take 5b502a7b2992 ("net: dsa:
>> propagate resolved link config via mac_link_up()") along with the
>> backport instead. This means that we don't diverge from upstream too
>> much and will make future backports easier.
>>
>> I've queued up these 3 commits to 5.4, thanks!
>in general I am fine with your suggested approach. however, I think at
>least one more backport is required then:
>91a208f2185ad4855ff03c342d0b7e4f5fc6f5df ("net: phylink: propagate
>resolved link config via mac_link_up()")
>Patches should be backported in a specific order also so we don't
>break git bisect:
>- phylink patch
>- dsa patch
>- the two lantiq GSWIP patches

Good point, I haven't realized there's an additional phylink patch
(which on it's own requires more dependencies and follow-ups). In this
case I'll just grab your backport, thanks!

-- 
Thanks,
Sasha