[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20220805062844.89787-1-yin31149@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 5 Aug 2022 14:28:44 +0800
From: Hawkins Jiawei <yin31149@...il.com>
To: kuba@...nel.org
Cc: 18801353760@....com, andrii@...nel.org, ast@...nel.org,
borisp@...dia.com, bpf@...r.kernel.org, daniel@...earbox.net,
davem@...emloft.net, edumazet@...gle.com, guwen@...ux.alibaba.com,
jakub@...udflare.com, john.fastabend@...il.com, kafai@...com,
kgraul@...ux.ibm.com, kpsingh@...nel.org,
linux-kernel-mentees@...ts.linuxfoundation.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
pabeni@...hat.com, paskripkin@...il.com, skhan@...uxfoundation.org,
songliubraving@...com,
syzbot+5f26f85569bd179c18ce@...kaller.appspotmail.com,
syzkaller-bugs@...glegroups.com, yhs@...com, yin31149@...il.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4] net: fix refcount bug in sk_psock_get (2)
On Thu, 4 Aug 2022 at 23:29, Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org> wrote:
>
> On Thu, 4 Aug 2022 11:05:15 +0800 Hawkins Jiawei wrote:
> > I wonder if it is proper to gather these together in a patchset, for
> > they are all about flags in sk_user_data, maybe:
> >
> > [PATCH v5 0/2] net: enhancement to flags in sk_user_data field
> > - introduce the patchset
> >
> > [PATCH v5 1/2] net: clean up code for flags in sk_user_data field
> > - refactor the things in include/linux/skmsg.h and
> > include/net/sock.h
> > - refactor the flags's usage by other code, such as
> > net/core/skmsg.c and kernel/bpf/reuseport_array.c
> >
> > [PATCH v5 2/2] net: fix refcount bug in sk_psock_get (2)
> > - add SK_USER_DATA_PSOCK flag in sk_user_data field
>
> Usually the fix comes first, because it needs to be backported to
> stable, and we don't want to have to pull extra commits into stable
> and risk regressions in code which was not directly involved in the bug.
Ok, I got it. Thanks for the explanation.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists