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  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:   Thu, 22 Jul 2021 09:23:36 +0200
From:   Johan Hovold <>
To:     Dongliang Mu <>
Cc:     Greg Kroah-Hartman <>,
        "David S. Miller" <>,
        Jakub Kicinski <>,
        Oliver Neukum <>,
        Anirudh Rayabharam <>,
        Dan Carpenter <>,
        Rustam Kovhaev <>,
        Zheng Yongjun <>,
        Emil Renner Berthing <>,,
        YueHaibing <>,,
        "open list:NETWORKING [GENERAL]" <>,
        linux-kernel <>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] usb: hso: fix error handling code of

On Thu, Jul 22, 2021 at 01:32:48PM +0800, Dongliang Mu wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 22, 2021 at 12:42 AM Johan Hovold <> wrote:

> > > A version of this patch has already been applied to net-next.
> >
> > That was apparently net (not net-next).
> >
> > > No idea which version that was or why the second patch hasn't been
> > > applied yet.
> It seems because I only sent the 1/2 patch in the v3. Also due to
> this, gregkh asked me to resend the whole patchset again.

Yeah, it's hard to keep track of submissions sometimes, especially if
not updating the whole series.

> > > Dongliang, if you're resending something here it should first be rebased
> > > on linux-next (net-next).
> >
> > And the resend of v3 of both patches has now also been applied to
> > net-next.
> >
> > Hopefully there are no conflicts between v2 and v3 but we'll see soon.
> You mean you apply a v2 patch into one tree? This thread already
> contains the v3 patch, and there is no v2 patch in the mailing list
> due to one incomplete email subject.
> BTW, v2->v3 only some label change due to naming style.

Ok, I can't keep track of this either. I just noticed that this patch
shows up in both net (for 5.14):

and net-next (for 5.15):

The net one was applied on the 15th and the net-next one yesterday. 

Judging from a quick look it appears to be the same diff so no damage


Powered by blists - more mailing lists