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 PHC | |
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Wed, 21 Dec 2022 13:41:59 +0100 From: Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org> To: Tudor Ambarus <tudor.ambarus@...aro.org> Cc: Willem de Bruijn <willemdebruijn.kernel@...il.com>, mst@...hat.com, jasowang@...hat.com, virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org, edumazet@...gle.com, davem@...emloft.net, kuba@...nel.org, pabeni@...hat.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org, willemb@...gle.com, syzkaller@...glegroups.com, liuhangbin@...il.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, joneslee@...gle.com Subject: Re: kernel BUG in __skb_gso_segment On Wed, Dec 21, 2022 at 09:42:59AM +0200, Tudor Ambarus wrote: > > > On 21.12.2022 09:37, Greg KH wrote: > > On Wed, Dec 21, 2022 at 09:28:16AM +0200, Tudor Ambarus wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > > > I added Greg KH to the thread, maybe he can shed some light on whether > > > new support can be marked as fixes and backported to stable. The rules > > > on what kind of patches are accepted into the -stable tree don't mention > > > new support: > > > https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/process/stable-kernel-rules.html > > > > As you say, we don't take new features into older kernels. Unless they > > fix a reported problem, if so, submit the git ids to us and we will be > > glad to review them. > > > > They do fix a bug. I'm taking care of it. Shall I update > Documentation/process/stable-kernel-rules.rst to mention this rule as > well? How exactly would you change it, and why?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists