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: Thu, 22 Dec 2022 11:20:01 +0200 From: Tudor Ambarus <tudor.ambarus@...aro.org> To: Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.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 21.12.2022 14:41, Greg KH wrote: > 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? Something like this: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-kernel/20221222091658.1975240-1-tudor.ambarus@linaro.org/T/#u Cheers, ta
Powered by blists - more mailing lists