Re: Patch "net-sysfs: Call dev_hold always in netdev_queue_add_kobject" has been added to the 5.3-stable tree

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Wed, Dec 18, 2019 at 08:38:56AM +0200, Jouni Högander wrote:
> Lukas Bulwahn <lukas.bulwahn@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
> 
> > On Tue, Dec 17, 2019 at 8:22 PM <gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> This is a note to let you know that I've just added the patch titled
> >>
> >>     net-sysfs: Call dev_hold always in netdev_queue_add_kobject
> >>
> >> to the 5.3-stable tree which can be found at:
> >>     http://www.kernel.org/git/?p=linux/kernel/git/stable/stable-queue.git;a=summary
> >>
> >> The filename of the patch is:
> >>      net-sysfs-call-dev_hold-always-in-netdev_queue_add_kobject.patch
> >> and it can be found in the queue-5.3 subdirectory.
> >>
> >> If you, or anyone else, feels it should not be added to the stable tree,
> >> please let <stable@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> know about it.
> >>
> >
> > I feel this commit should not be added to 5.3, and probably also not yet to 5.4.
> >
> > We are still hunting another regression on this slowly incoming series
> > of bug-fix patches.
> >
> > I believe commit b8eb718348b8 ("net-sysfs: Fix reference count leak in
> > rx|netdev_queue_add_kobject") [see Fixes in this commit] has not been
> > backported to 5.3 due to regressions, and backporting this commit to
> > 5.3 without b8eb718348b8 is probably even a worse idea.
> >
> > A next patch, closing the last(?) regression we are aware of, is on
> > its way.
> >
> > Tetsuo, Jouni, did I capture the situation right? A short ACK on not
> > adding to stable yet would be nice.
> 
> Yes you did. No need to add this to stable as another patch mentioned
> here ("net-sysfs: Fix reference count leak in
> rx|netdev_queue_add_kobject") is not there either.

Ok, I'll go drop this for now.  But as this keeps trying to come back
into the stable tree (based on the commit message text), can you please
send stable@vger the git ids of all of the commits that should be
merged, when they are all "ready" so we know we did this correctly?

thanks,

greg k-h



[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Index of Archives]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]

  Powered by Linux