netdev - Re: [PATCH net v6] net: sched: cls_u32: Fix u32's systematic failure to free IDR entries for hnodes.

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: <20241112071822.1a6f3c9a@kernel.org>
Date: Tue, 12 Nov 2024 07:18:22 -0800
From: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
To: Jamal Hadi Salim <jhs@...atatu.com>
Cc: Alexandre Ferrieux <alexandre.ferrieux@...il.com>, Eric Dumazet
 <edumazet@...gle.com>, Cong Wang <xiyou.wangcong@...il.com>, Jiri Pirko
 <jiri@...nulli.us>, alexandre.ferrieux@...nge.com, Linux Kernel Network
 Developers <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net v6] net: sched: cls_u32: Fix u32's systematic
 failure to free IDR entries for hnodes.

On Tue, 12 Nov 2024 07:23:29 -0500 Jamal Hadi Salim wrote:
> > Separate patch - okay, but why are you asking people to send the tests
> > to net-next? These sort of requests lead people to try to run
> > linux-next tests on stable trees.  
> 
> AFAIK, those are the rules.

Do you have more info, or this is more of a "your understanding" thing?
E.g. rules for which subsystem? are they specified somewhere?
I'm used to merging the fix with the selftest, two minor reasons pro:
 - less burden on submitter
 - backporters can see and use the test to validate, immediately
con:
 - higher risk of conflicts, but that's my problem (we really need to
   alpha-sort the makefiles, sigh)