netdev - Re: [PATCH] Bluetooth: hci_sync: Fix handling of HCI_QUIRK_STRICT_DUPLICATE

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: Tue, 12 Sep 2023 12:09:33 -0700
From: Luiz Augusto von Dentz <luiz.dentz@...il.com>
To: Linux regressions mailing list <regressions@...ts.linux.dev>
Cc: patchwork-bot+bluetooth@...nel.org, linux-bluetooth@...r.kernel.org, 
	netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, Stefan Agner <stefan@...er.ch>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Bluetooth: hci_sync: Fix handling of HCI_QUIRK_STRICT_DUPLICATE_FILTER

Hi,

On Mon, Sep 11, 2023 at 6:40 AM Linux regression tracking (Thorsten
Leemhuis) <regressions@...mhuis.info> wrote:
>
> On 31.08.23 00:20, patchwork-bot+bluetooth@...nel.org wrote:
> >
> > This patch was applied to bluetooth/bluetooth-next.git (master)
> > by Luiz Augusto von Dentz <luiz.von.dentz@...el.com>:
> >
> > On Tue, 29 Aug 2023 13:59:36 -0700 you wrote:
> >> From: Luiz Augusto von Dentz <luiz.von.dentz@...el.com>
> >>
> >> When HCI_QUIRK_STRICT_DUPLICATE_FILTER is set LE scanning requires
> >> periodic restarts of the scanning procedure as the controller would
> >> consider device previously found as duplicated despite of RSSI changes,
> >> but in order to set the scan timeout properly set le_scan_restart needs
> >> to be synchronous so it shall not use hci_cmd_sync_queue which defers
> >> the command processing to cmd_sync_work.
> >>
> >> [...]
> >
> > Here is the summary with links:
> >   - Bluetooth: hci_sync: Fix handling of HCI_QUIRK_STRICT_DUPLICATE_FILTER
> >     https://git.kernel.org/bluetooth/bluetooth-next/c/52bf4fd43f75
>
> That is (maybe among others?) a fix for a regression from 6.1, so why
> was this merged into a "for-next" branch instead of a branch that
> targets the current cycle?

We were late for including it to 6.5, that said the regression was
introduced in 6.4, but I could probably have it marked for stable just
to make sure it would get backported to affected versions.

> Ciao, Thorsten (wearing his 'the Linux kernel's regression tracker' hat)
> --
> Everything you wanna know about Linux kernel regression tracking:
> https://linux-regtracking.leemhuis.info/about/#tldr
> If I did something stupid, please tell me, as explained on that page.
>
> [1] see
> https://lore.kernel.org/linux-bluetooth/b0b672069ee6a9e43fed1a07406c6dd3@agner.ch/



-- 
Luiz Augusto von Dentz