Re: FAILED: patch "[PATCH] prctl: Disable prctl(PR_SET_MDWE) on parisc" failed to apply to 6.5-stable tree

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

 



On Mon, Nov 27, 2023 at 12:59 PM Catalin Marinas
<catalin.marinas@xxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Nov 24, 2023 at 04:10:25PM +0100, Helge Deller wrote:
> > On 11/24/23 12:35, gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> > > The patch below does not apply to the 6.5-stable tree.
> > > If someone wants it applied there, or to any other stable or longterm
> > > tree, then please email the backport, including the original git commit
> > > id to <stable@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>.
> > >
> > > To reproduce the conflict and resubmit, you may use the following commands:
> > >
> > > git fetch https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/stable/linux.git/ linux-6.5.y
> > > git checkout FETCH_HEAD
> > > git cherry-pick -x 793838138c157d4c49f4fb744b170747e3dabf58
> > > # <resolve conflicts, build, test, etc.>
> > > git commit -s
> > > git send-email --to '<stable@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>' --in-reply-to '2023112456-linked-nape-bf19@gregkh' --subject-prefix 'PATCH 6.5.y' HEAD^..
> > >
> > > Possible dependencies:
> > >
> > > 793838138c15 ("prctl: Disable prctl(PR_SET_MDWE) on parisc")
> > > 24e41bf8a6b4 ("mm: add a NO_INHERIT flag to the PR_SET_MDWE prctl")
> > > 0da668333fb0 ("mm: make PR_MDWE_REFUSE_EXEC_GAIN an unsigned long")
> >
> > Greg, I think the most clean solution is that you pull in this patch:
> >
> > commit 24e41bf8a6b424c76c5902fb999e9eca61bdf83d
> > Author: Florent Revest <revest@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > Date:   Mon Aug 28 17:08:57 2023 +0200
> >     mm: add a NO_INHERIT flag to the PR_SET_MDWE prctl
> >
> > as well into 6.5-stable and 6.6-stable prior to applying my patch.
> >
> > Florent, Kees and Catalin, do you see any issues if this patch
> > ("mm: add a NO_INHERIT flag to the PR_SET_MDWE prctl") is backported
> > to 6.5 and 6.6 too?
> > If yes, I'm happy to just send the trivial backport of my patch below...
>
> TBH, given that the NO_INHERIT MDWE is a new feature and it took us a
> few rounds to define its semantics, I'd rather not back-port it unless
> someone has a strong need for it in 6.5 (not sure the stable rules even
> allow for this). The parisc patch is simple enough to be backported on
> its own.

I agree with Catalin :)





[Index of Archives]     [Linux Kernel]     [Kernel Development Newbies]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Video for Linux]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite Hiking]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]

  Powered by Linux