On 24/08/08 11:52AM, Christian Heusel wrote: > On 24/08/08 08:38AM, Greg KH wrote: > > On Wed, Aug 07, 2024 at 08:34:48PM +0200, Christian Heusel wrote: > > > On 24/08/07 04:12PM, Greg KH wrote: > > > > On Mon, Aug 05, 2024 at 09:28:29PM +0000, avladu@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote: > > > > > Hello, > > > > > > > > > > This patch needs to be backported to the stable 6.1.x and 6.64.x branches, as the initial patch https://github.com/torvalds/linux/commit/e269d79c7d35aa3808b1f3c1737d63dab504ddc8 was backported a few days ago: https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/stable/linux.git/commit/include/linux/virtio_net.h?h=3Dv6.1.103&id=3D5b1997487a3f3373b0f580c8a20b56c1b64b0775 > > > > > https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/stable/linux.git/commit/include/linux/virtio_net.h?h=3Dv6.6.44&id=3D90d41ebe0cd4635f6410471efc1dd71b33e894cf > > > > > > > > Please provide a working backport, the change does not properly > > > > cherry-pick. > > > > > > > > greg k-h > > > > > > Hey Greg, hey Sasha, > > > > > > this patch also needs backporting to the 6.6.y and 6.10.y series as the > > > buggy commit was backported to to all three series. > > > > What buggy commit? > > The issue is that commit e269d79c7d35 ("net: missing check virtio") > introduces a bug which is fixed by 89add40066f9 ("net: drop bad gso > csum_start and offset in virtio_net_hdr") which it also carries a > "Fixes:" tag for. > > Therefore it would be good to also get 89add40066f9 backported. > > > And how was this tested, it does not apply cleanly to the trees for me > > at all. > > I have tested this with the procedure as described in [0]: > > $ git switch linux-6.10.y > $ git cherry-pick -x 89add40066f9ed9abe5f7f886fe5789ff7e0c50e > Auto-merging net/ipv4/udp_offload.c > [linux-6.10.y fbc0d2bea065] net: drop bad gso csum_start and offset in virtio_net_hdr > Author: Willem de Bruijn <willemb@xxxxxxxxxx> > Date: Mon Jul 29 16:10:12 2024 -0400 > 3 files changed, 12 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-) > > This also works for linux-6.6.y, but not for linux-6.1.y, as it fails > with a merge error there. > > The relevant commit is confirmed to fix the issue in the relevant Githu > issue here[1]: > > @marek22k commented > > They both fix the problem for me. > > > confused, > > Sorry for the confusion! I hope the above clears things up a little :) > > > greg k-h > > Cheers, > Christian > > [0]: https://lore.kernel.org/all/2024060624-platinum-ladies-9214@gregkh/ > [1]: https://github.com/tailscale/tailscale/issues/13041#issuecomment-2272326491 Since I didn't hear from anybody so far about the above issue it's a bit unclear on how to proceed here. I still think that I would make sense to go with my above suggestion about patching at least 2 out of the 3 stable series where the patch applies cleanly. ~ Chris
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
