netdev - Re: [PATCH net V3] net: stmmac: Premature loop termination check was ignored

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] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Thu, 23 Feb 2023 12:34:18 +0100
From:   Jochen Henneberg <jh@...neberg-systemdesign.com>
To:     Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
Cc:     Simon Horman <simon.horman@...igine.com>,
        Giuseppe Cavallaro <peppe.cavallaro@...com>,
        Alexandre Torgue <alexandre.torgue@...s.st.com>,
        Jose Abreu <joabreu@...opsys.com>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
        Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
        Maxime Coquelin <mcoquelin.stm32@...il.com>,
        Ong Boon Leong <boon.leong.ong@...el.com>,
        netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-stm32@...md-mailman.stormreply.com,
        linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net V3] net: stmmac: Premature loop termination check
 was ignored


Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch> writes:

> On Wed, Feb 22, 2023 at 04:49:55PM +0100, Henneberg - Systemdesign wrote:
>> 
>> Simon Horman <simon.horman@...igine.com> writes:
>> 
>> > On Wed, Feb 22, 2023 at 08:38:28AM +0100, Jochen Henneberg wrote:
>> >> 
>> >> The premature loop termination check makes sense only in case of the
>> >> jump to read_again where the count may have been updated. But
>> >> read_again did not include the check.
>> >> 
>> >> Fixes: bba2556efad6 ("net: stmmac: Enable RX via AF_XDP zero-copy")
>> >
>> > This commit was included in v5.13
>> >
>> >> Fixes: ec222003bd94 ("net: stmmac: Prepare to add Split Header support")
>> >
>> > While this one was included in v5.4
>> >
>> > It seems to me that each of the above commits correspond to one
>> > of the two hunks below. I don't know if that means this
>> > patch should be split in two to assist backporting.
>> >
>> 
>> I was thinking about this already but the change was so trivial that I
>> hesitated to split it into two commits. I wanted I will surely change
>> this.
>
> The advantage of splitting is that it makes back porting easy. Both
> parts are needed for 6.1 and 5.15. 5.10 only needs the fix for
> ec222003bd94. It if does not easily apply to 5.10 it could get
> dropped. By splitting it, the backporting probably happens fully
> automated, no human involved.

Understood. Will do the split and send two new patches. I will not
continue with version upcounting and not send a patch series but two
completly independent patches.

Jochen

>
> 	Andrew


-- 
Henneberg - Systemdesign
Jochen Henneberg
Loehnfeld 26
21423 Winsen (Luhe)
--
Fon: +49 172 160 14 69
Url: https://www.henneberg-systemdesign.com