netdev - Re: [PATCH 1/2] phonet: take correct lock to peek at the RX queue

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: <13267a321e28b697405b918068ec21b28033db6f.camel@redhat.com>
Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2024 15:40:39 +0100
From: Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>
To: Rémi Denis-Courmont <remi@...lab.net>, 
 courmisch@...il.com, davem@...emloft.net, edumazet@...gle.com,
 kuba@...nel.org
Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] phonet: take correct lock to peek at the RX queue

On Tue, 2024-02-13 at 14:55 +0200, Rémi Denis-Courmont wrote:
> Le 13 février 2024 14:12:57 GMT+02:00, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com> a écrit :
> > On Sat, 2024-02-10 at 14:50 +0200, Rémi Denis-Courmont wrote:
> > > From: Rémi Denis-Courmont <courmisch@...il.com>
> > > 
> > > Reported-by: Luosili <rootlab@...wei.com>
> > > Signed-off-by: Rémi Denis-Courmont <courmisch@...il.com>
> > 
> > Looks good, but you need to add a non empty commit message.
> 
> With all due respect, the headline is self-explanatory in my opinion. You can't compare this with the more involved second patch. Also the second patch was *not* reported by Huawei Rootlab, but inferred by me and thus has no existing documentation - unlike this one.
> 
> As for the bug ID, I don't know it (security list didn't pass 
> it on to me). Anyhow it seems that Eric Dumazet already 
> either found it or filled it in, so I don't know what else
> you're asking for.

We don't need a bug ID. We need the hash of the commit introducing the
issue. You should be able to find it digging in the git history,
looking for the changeset introducing the problematic code. 

We need such tag for both patches. Eric already provided it for 1/2,
you should find it for patch 2/2.

See:

https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/latest/source/Documentation/process/5.Posting.rst#L204

Cheers,

Paolo