On Mon, Sep 18, 2023 at 8:09 PM Luiz Capitulino <luizcap@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Valis, Greg, > > I noticed that 4.14 is missing this fix while we backported all three fixes > from this series to all stable kernels: > > https://lore.kernel.org/all/20230729123202.72406-1-jhs@xxxxxxxxxxxx > > Is there a reason to have skipped 4.14 for this fix? It seems we need it. Hi Luiz! I see no reason why it should be skipped for 4.14 I've just checked 4.14.325 - it is vulnerable and needs this fix. Best regards, valis > > This is only compiled-tested though, would be good to have a confirmation > from Valis that the issue is present on 4.14 before applying. > > - Luiz > > diff --git a/net/sched/cls_fw.c b/net/sched/cls_fw.c > index e63f9c2e37e5..7b04b315b2bd 100644 > --- a/net/sched/cls_fw.c > +++ b/net/sched/cls_fw.c > @@ -281,7 +281,6 @@ static int fw_change(struct net *net, struct sk_buff *in_skb, > return -ENOBUFS; > > fnew->id = f->id; > - fnew->res = f->res; > #ifdef CONFIG_NET_CLS_IND > fnew->ifindex = f->ifindex; > #endif /* CONFIG_NET_CLS_IND */ > -- > 2.40.1 >
