[Re: [PATCH 0/1] RFC: linux-5.15.y ksmbd backport for CVE-2023-38431] On 13/12/2023 (Wed 15:34) Greg KH wrote: > On Tue, Dec 12, 2023 at 03:45:55PM -0500, Paul Gortmaker wrote: > > [Re: [PATCH 0/1] RFC: linux-5.15.y ksmbd backport for CVE-2023-38431] On 12/12/2023 (Tue 21:04) Greg KH wrote: > > > > > On Tue, Dec 12, 2023 at 01:47:44PM -0500, paul.gortmaker@xxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote: > > > > From: Paul Gortmaker <paul.gortmaker@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > > > > > > This is a bit long, but I've never touched this code and all I can do is > > > > compile test it. So the below basically represents a capture of my > > > > thought process in fixing this for the v5.15.y-stable branch. > > > > > > Nice work, but really, given that there are _SO_ many ksmb patches that > > > have NOT been backported to 5.15.y, I would strongly recommend that we > > > just mark the thing as depending on BROKEN there for now as your one > > > > I'd be 100% fine with that. Can't speak for anyone else though. > > > > > backport here is not going to make a dent in the fixes that need to be > > > applied there to resolve the known issues that the codebase currently > > > has resolved in newer kernels. > > > > > > Do you use this codebase on 5.15.y? What drove you to want to backport > > > > I don't use it, and I don't know of anyone who does. > > Then why are you all backporting stuff for it? Firstly, you've cut the context where I already explained that I did it because others said it couldn't be done. Of all people, I am sure you can respect that. The Yocto Project still offers v5.15 as an option, and whenever I can, I help out to advance the Yocto Project as time permits. Ask Richard. > If no one steps up, I'll just mark the thing as broken, it is _so_ far > behind in patches that it's just sad. Again, in this case - I have no problem with that - but as a note of record -- whenever linux-stable removes a Kconfig, either explicitly or by a depends on BROKEN - it does trigger fallout for some people. The Yocto/OE does an audit on the Kconfig output looking for options that were explicitly set (or un-set) by the user, or by base templates. If they don't land in the final .config file -- it lets you know. Paul. -- > thanks, > > greg k-h
