netdev - Re: [PATCH net] r8169: fix ASPM-related problem for chip version 42 and 43

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <ee7172c0-b5f1-c5e2-55d8-2b712ceb6ea6@leemhuis.info>
Date: Fri, 14 Jul 2023 10:16:35 +0200
From: "Linux regression tracking (Thorsten Leemhuis)"
 <regressions@...mhuis.info>
To: Heiner Kallweit <hkallweit1@...il.com>,
 Linux regressions mailing list <regressions@...ts.linux.dev>,
 Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
 Realtek linux nic maintainers <nic_swsd@...ltek.com>,
 Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>
Cc: "netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
 joey.joey586@...il.com, Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net] r8169: fix ASPM-related problem for chip version 42
 and 43

[Short version: sorry for the noise, a stale file sent us sideways.]

On 14.07.23 08:58, Linux regression tracking (Thorsten Leemhuis) wrote:
> [ccing greg]
> 
> On 14.07.23 08:34, Heiner Kallweit wrote:
>> On 14.07.2023 08:30, Linux regression tracking (Thorsten Leemhuis) wrote:
>>> On 14.07.23 07:34, Heiner Kallweit wrote:
>>>> On 14.07.2023 05:31, Linux regression tracking (Thorsten Leemhuis) wrote:
>>>>> On 13.07.23 21:46, Heiner Kallweit wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>> Fixes: 5fc3f6c90cca ("r8169: consolidate disabling ASPM before EPHY access")
>>>>>  Closes: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=217635 # [0]
>>>>> A "Cc: stable@...r.kernel.org" would be nice, too, to get this fixed in
>>>>> 6.4, where this surfaced (reminder: no, a Fixes: tag is not enough to
>>>>> ensure the backport there).
>>>> That's different in the net subsystem. The net (vs. net-next) annotation
>>>> ensures the backport.
>>>
>>> Huh, how does that work? I thought "net" currently means "for 6.5" while
>>> "net-next" implies 6.6?
>>
>> https://www.kernel.org/doc/Documentation/networking/netdev-FAQ.txt

I just learned on social media that's a stale file that doesn't exist
anymore in mainline (I'll talk to Konstantin, maybe he can remove it to
avoid similar problems in the future). That document was converted to
rst and later...

>> See question:
>> I see a network patch and I think it should be backported to stable.
>> Should I request it via "stable@...r.kernel.org" like the references in
>> the kernel's Documentation/process/stable-kernel-rules.rst file say?

...this section was actually removed in dbbe7c962c3 ("docs: networking:
drop special stable handling") [v5.12-rc3]; later that document moved here:

https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/process/maintainer-netdev.html

To quote:

```

1.5.7. Stable tree

While it used to be the case that netdev submissions were not supposed
to carry explicit CC: stable@...r.kernel.org tags that is no longer the
case today. Please follow the standard stable rules in
Documentation/process/stable-kernel-rules.rst, and make sure you include
appropriate Fixes tags!
```

That clears things up. Ciao, Thorsten