On 21.12.21 16:03, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 21, 2021 at 03:39:04PM +0100, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
>> On 21.12.21 15:03, Heikki Krogerus wrote:
>>> The driver must make sure there is an actual connection
>>> before checking details about the USB Power Delivery
>>> contract. Those details are not valid unless there is a
>>> connection.
>>>
>>> This fixes NULL pointer dereference that is caused by an
>>> attempt to register bogus partner alternate mode that the
>>> firmware on some platform may report before the actual
>>> connection.
>>>
>>> Reported-by: Chris Hixon <linux-kernel-bugs@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>> Fixes: 6cbe4b2d5a3f ("usb: typec: ucsi: Check the partner alt modes always if there is PD contract")
>>> Link: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=215117
>>> Signed-off-by: Heikki Krogerus <heikki.krogerus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>> ---
>>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> Instead of using the "BugLink" tag, I'm now using "Link" tag with the
>>> link to the bug as requested.
>>
>> Thx!
>>
>>> There was a request to have also another Link tag pointing to some
>>> other discussion on the mailing list, but I failed to understand what
>>> was the point with that - I also didn't find any commits where
>>> something like that had been used before.
>>
>> There are quite a few commits that use more that two "Link" tags, as
>> they should point to "related discussions or any other background
>> information behind the change" that "can be found on the web" (Quotes
>> from Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst) -- hence there is no
>> limit. That being said:
>>
>>> I may be mistaken here, but I got the impression that you create the
>>> mailing list discussion
>>
>> You are mistaken: I created it because the bugzilla ticket was ignored
>> in bugzilla for weeks and might have forgotten otherwise -- no wonder,
>> was bugzilla.kernel.org is not the official place to report USB bugs
>> according to the MAINTAINERS file.
>>
>>> just so you can have the extra Link tag
>>> pointing to it, and that Link tag you want only because you have made
>>> your scripts rely on it.
>>
>> They rely on it as almost all subsystems expect bug to be reported by
>> mail, as they are instructed by
>> Documentation/admin-guide/reporting-issues.rst
>>
>>> The extra email thread in any case does not seem to contain any real
>>> additional information that the bug report does not have, so the extra
>>> Link tag pointing to it does not provide any real value on top of the
>>> link to bug itself.
>>
>> In this case that's true, as I have to tell regzbot about the fix then
>> manually (the plan it to make regzbot also detect links to
>> bugzilla.kernel.org, but I fear I have no time to work on that in the
>> next few weeks :-/ ). But in similar cases it's different, as there the
>> developers continued discussing the issue by mail -- then it's
>> definitely worth linking there as well.
>
> So for this case, what type of tag should I add here to get rezbot to
> manually pick this up?
Just commit it. Afterwards someone needs to send '#regzbot fixed-by:
<commit-id>' to the thread with the report, for example as a reply to
this mail:
https://lore.kernel.org/linux-usb/eb34f98f-00ef-3238-2daa-80481116035d@xxxxxxxxxxxxx/
But you can leave that to me, regzbot will alert me anyway once it sees
a fix with "Fixes: 6cbe4b2d5a3f". That's the commit that introduced the
regression. But making regzbot mark the entry as fixed solely on this
afaics would be a bad idea, as one commit can cause different
regressions :-/
Making regbzot detect "Link:" tags to bugzilla tickets it knowns about
is pretty high on my todo list for regzbot. I would have worked on this
already, but I have to focus on other things for now to fulfil the
milestones I promised to deliver with regzbot. :-/
Ciao, Thorsten
