netdev - Re: [PATCH net v2 2/7] net: dsa: mt7530: fix trapping frames with multiple CPU ports on MT7530

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]

Message-ID: <20230613211432.dc66py7nh34ehiv4@skbuf>
Date: Wed, 14 Jun 2023 00:14:32 +0300
From: Vladimir Oltean <olteanv@...il.com>
To: Arınç ÜNAL <arinc.unal@...nc9.com>
Cc: Daniel Golle <daniel@...rotopia.org>,
	Landen Chao <Landen.Chao@...iatek.com>,
	DENG Qingfang <dqfext@...il.com>,
	Sean Wang <sean.wang@...iatek.com>, Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>,
	Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>,
	"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
	Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
	Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
	Matthias Brugger <matthias.bgg@...il.com>,
	AngeloGioacchino Del Regno <angelogioacchino.delregno@...labora.com>,
	Russell King <linux@...linux.org.uk>,
	Frank Wunderlich <frank-w@...lic-files.de>,
	Bartel Eerdekens <bartel.eerdekens@...stell8.be>,
	mithat.guner@...ont.com, erkin.bozoglu@...ont.com,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
	linux-mediatek@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net v2 2/7] net: dsa: mt7530: fix trapping frames with
 multiple CPU ports on MT7530

On Wed, Jun 14, 2023 at 12:04:10AM +0300, Arınç ÜNAL wrote:
> Because I don't see the latter patch as a fix. It treats the symptom, not
> the cause.
> 
> Anyway, I'm fine with taking this patch from this series and put it on my
> series for net-next instead.

Right, but what seems to have been the case during the net.git
(and linux-stable.git) triage so far is that user impact matters.
A configuration that works by coincidence and not by intention, but
otherwise works reliably, still works, at the end of the day.

If you read the weekly net.git pull requests sent to Linus Torvalds,
you'll see that maintainers try to make a summary of what had to be
changed and why. There isn't really a strong reason why this patch *has*
to be in those pull requests. That's kind of the mindset of what makes
"stable" "stable".