netdev - Re: [net v2 0/2] Fix rcu_read_lock issues in netdev-genl

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: <ZzY6M_je4RODUYOP@LQ3V64L9R2>
Date: Thu, 14 Nov 2024 09:58:11 -0800
From: Joe Damato <jdamato@...tly.com>
To: Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>
Cc: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	edumazet@...gle.com, amritha.nambiar@...el.com,
	sridhar.samudrala@...el.com, mkarsten@...terloo.ca,
	"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
	open list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Mina Almasry <almasrymina@...gle.com>,
	Simon Horman <horms@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [net v2 0/2] Fix rcu_read_lock issues in netdev-genl

On Thu, Nov 14, 2024 at 10:06:02AM +0100, Paolo Abeni wrote:
> 
> 
> On 11/14/24 07:29, Joe Damato wrote:
> > On Wed, Nov 13, 2024 at 06:47:35PM -0800, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> >> On Wed, 13 Nov 2024 02:17:50 +0000 Joe Damato wrote:
> >>> base-commit: a58f00ed24b849d449f7134fd5d86f07090fe2f5
> >>
> >> which is a net-next commit.. please rebase on net
> > 
> > I thought I asked about this in the previous thread, but I probably
> > wasn't clear with my question.
> > 
> > Let me try again:
> > 
> > Patch 1 will apply to net and is a fixes and CC's stable, and fixes
> > a similar issue to the one Paolo reported, not the exact same path,
> > though.
> > 
> > Patch 2 will not apply to net, because the code it fixes is not in
> > net yet. This fixes the splat Paolo reported.
> > 
> > So... back to the question in the cover letter from the RFC :) I
> > suppose the right thing to do is split the series:
> > 
> > - Rebase patch 1 on net (it applies as is) and send it on its own
> > - Send patch 2 on its own against net-next
> > 
> > Or... something else ?
> 
> I'm sorry for the late reply.
> 
> Please send the two patch separately, patch 1 targeting (and rebased on)
> net and patch 2 targeting (and based on) net-next.
> 

OK, I've done that. I left the fixes tag on patch 2 despite it
targeting net-next, but didn't CC stable since the code doesn't need
to be backported.