On Mon, Oct 24, 2016 at 10:32 AM, Greg KH <greg@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 24, 2016 at 08:54:39AM -0700, Josh Zimmerman wrote:
>> If the TPM we're connecting to uses a static burst count, it will report
>> a burst count of zero throughout the response read. However, get_burstcount
>> assumes that a response of zero indicates that the TPM is not ready to
>> receive more data. In this case, it returns a negative error code, which
>> is passed on to tpm_tis_{write,read}_bytes as a u16, causing
>> them to read/write far too many bytes.
>>
>> This patch checks for negative return codes and bails out from recv_data
>> and tpm_tis_send_data.
>>
>> Fixes: 1107d065fdf1
>
> huh?
>
> No signed off?
>
> <formletter>
>
> This is not the correct way to submit patches for inclusion in the
> stable kernel tree. Please read Documentation/stable_kernel_rules.txt
> for how to do this properly.
>
> </formletter>
Oh, I apologize. I was unfamiliar with the stable@ list, and was asked
in v1 of my patch to add it to CCs. I was unaware that there were
further prerequisites to doing so. From reading
stable_kernel_rules.txt's requirements, it doesn't seem like this is
yet ready to be sent here, and perhaps it doesn't belong on the
stable@ list at all. Moving stable@ to BCC.
Josh
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe stable" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html