netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next] net: Remove redundant variable declaration in __dev_change

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: <20250214-bald-mammoth-of-opportunity-48a0bb@leitao>
Date: Fri, 14 Feb 2025 08:09:19 -0800
From: Breno Leitao <leitao@...ian.org>
To: Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
Cc: "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
	Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
	Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
	Simon Horman <horms@...nel.org>,
	Nicolas Dichtel <nicolas.dichtel@...nd.com>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] net: Remove redundant variable declaration in
 __dev_change_flags()

On Fri, Feb 14, 2025 at 04:02:10PM +0100, Andrew Lunn wrote:
> > But I agree with you, if you needed to look at it, it means the message
> > is NOT good enough. I will update it.
> 
> Thanks.
> 
> > 
> > > > Fixes: 991fb3f74c142e ("dev: always advertise rx_flags changes via netlink")
> > > 
> > > I suppose there is also a danger here this code has at some point in
> > > the past has been refactored, such that the outer old_flags was used
> > > at some point? Backporting this patch could then break something?  Did
> > > you check for this? Again, a comment in the commit message that you
> > > have checked this is safe to backport would be nice.
> > 
> > I haven't look at this, and I don't think this should be backported,
> > thus, that is why I sent to net-next and didn't cc: stable.
> > 
> > That said, I don't think this should be backported, since it is not
> > a big deal. Shouldn't I add the Fixes: in such case?
> 
> The danger of adding a Fixes: is that the ML bot will see the Fixes:
> tag and might select it for backporting, even if we did not explicitly
> queue it up for back porting. So i suggest dropping the tag.

Makes sense. I will drop the Fixes: tag and send a v2 to net-next.

Thanks Andrew,
--breno