From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.remote-ip=100.103.45.18 ARC-Seal: i=1; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc20261015; a=rsa-sha256; cv=none; t=1792785302; b=mK3ezIVGw7M4RvxEhM3dT6c1wkUETk1fO/yxT+reZtTwi2bGtkS6OJcfEGpJQHpHfzob Y4Cnu7rV69KRpUuCIhL1v8YDDet9iPCXUaQwVCc+ewcjNpSAjpsipQ6um+LQAiGwZWwuD +Mva2PLFw7kjK96w+MOjcpzhrFt2EdJIpfAHwBF4FOHJgBy5feRys+oxt6yzHs+jnwA8c 3fsC3MGUWygeEvFIUibLx/825VFsy6BlFsMWxfy+EuZ3bydOlSe06F2V6rJWsxZ+8ncWV PNB7eHD+XtwOgq50Xkrn2TfIK3LEamfpO17EEzfjWlKX331SM14cAHFL8vUxgJwiKwQ== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc20261015; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; t=1792785302; h=Received:DKIM-Signature:From:To:Cc:Subject:Date:Message-ID: In-Reply-To:References:Auto-Submitted:Content-Type: Content-Transfer-Encoding:MIME-Version; bh=Z9zRtXHe/J1k/4/9wAeq1n+PwAt+ioXmV3zyjSNrjDw=; b=RN1MwGFQXwGob85hUTGvofn9z6tKKGKdNL6+mwIz8DgVgYQNF30SLHkTvHvY237N4iu4 7rlr/XZH82hMoSsKU3XhjBKRRhMv5byMiheiv/6x0hNf74wP/CXGYijloUO14q+LCCffV eNV43KFqFbYG20lLRg5oIJcAkmSvpRItcJZn1rXS2OToA6AUClewU1fueGuK/R28OcW6U CJZ8SPcJVpbDN+4N34FbgtN0s/32wR8qJnnei0GC9hJ2q/SXDqheZkD4A3YGeV0/VQJYH 4e7IRoPFg0tP5JRZovhWxkQmjeIbiu0Wr9k895+qTPIp+p6Ad2vCD7QeMDSjQYvO9xQ== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=k20260515 header.b=O6hR1sIP; arc=none smtp.remote-ip=100.103.45.18 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (quasi.space.kernel.org [100.103.45.18]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature ECDSA (prime256v1)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B61B860A2610; Fri, 23 Oct 2026 19:55:01 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key, unprotected) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=k20260515 header.b=O6hR1sIP Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id ED9B01F031E4; Fri, 23 Oct 2026 19:55:00 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=kernel.org; s=k20260515; t=1792785301; bh=Z9zRtXHe/J1k/4/9wAeq1n+PwAt+ioXmV3zyjSNrjDw=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References; b=O6hR1sIPnyQzvbQK8WkVWIULWirtLcio7VqM+OP35DUcgThdZOkfBRPRYBUOUxI6v r9WLLKzyyyrPyYU/3+cf5TWN0dx3ERBUkGA7wUzY98MpXzJV0KxNGbM3zHmtkAsecS DVg5qCIQg6P9iAXlT0Z5cWloNfn/u3Yabq7aS8vtFN3Zo52a14yK1uCNCcf0ksyDW1 nPhchs+TdacGpJgEjl55LyY36d82vpldM2qkx4dA+EF6hxnwFvPQS2L91UfLMpIUB2 vt4gzx2h8csu0eMgD91VRooeQp5jclSDwKbijmK+nZozFPHriZ3pSHTtUm16A3X5RG zRyjI9M5uLuKA== From: netdev-bot+sinfo@kernel.org To: Tristan Madani Cc: Andrew Lunn , "David S . Miller" , Eric Dumazet , Jakub Kicinski , Paolo Abeni , Qingfang Deng , linux-ppp@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, stable@vger.kernel.org, Tristan Madani Subject: Re: [PATCH net] ppp: fix stale pointer access after pskb_may_pull in ppp_ccp_peek Date: Fri, 23 Oct 2026 19:55:00 +0000 Message-ID: <179278530053.3327.8146002814113286756@kernel.org> In-Reply-To: <20261023195309.3527129-1-tristmd@gmail.com> References: <20261023195309.3527129-1-tristmd@gmail.com> Auto-Submitted: auto-generated Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: List-Owner: Precedence: list MIME-Version: 1.0 Hi! This is an automated message. This series looks like a fix, but its commit messages seem to be missing some information: - How the issue was discovered, e.g. hit in production, hit during development, syzbot report, manual code inspection, LLM or static analysis tool scan. - Whether the issue was actually triggered, or is only theoretical (e.g. found by code inspection). If it was triggered please include the symptoms, like the stack trace or error messages. Please do not repost the series just to address the above. Instead, reply to this email with the missing information, so that reviewers can take it into account. If the series needs another revision for other reasons, please include the information in the commit messages then. The evaluation is done by an LLM so it may be wrong, if you think that is the case please reply and explain.