From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752670Ab3G1Ejq (ORCPT ); Sun, 28 Jul 2013 00:39:46 -0400 Received: from shards.monkeyblade.net ([149.20.54.216]:52692 "EHLO shards.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751730Ab3G1Ejo (ORCPT ); Sun, 28 Jul 2013 00:39:44 -0400 Date: Sat, 27 Jul 2013 21:39:43 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <20130727.213943.1973842777687951434.davem@davemloft.net> To: gregkh@linuxfoundation.org Cc: ben@decadent.org.uk, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, stable@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [ 06/79] net: Swap ver and type in pppoe_hdr From: David Miller In-Reply-To: <20130728041616.GA32761@kroah.com> References: <20130727.175541.1879192128080680197.davem@davemloft.net> <1374981271.2476.0.camel@deadeye.wl.decadent.org.uk> <20130728041616.GA32761@kroah.com> X-Mailer: Mew version 6.5 on Emacs 24.1 / Mule 6.0 (HANACHIRUSATO) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Greylist: Sender succeeded SMTP AUTH, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.5.1 (shards.monkeyblade.net [0.0.0.0]); Sat, 27 Jul 2013 21:39:43 -0700 (PDT) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org From: Greg KH Date: Sat, 27 Jul 2013 21:16:16 -0700 > On Sun, Jul 28, 2013 at 04:14:31AM +0100, Ben Hutchings wrote: >> On Sat, 2013-07-27 at 17:55 -0700, David Miller wrote: >> > From: Ben Hutchings >> > Date: Sat, 27 Jul 2013 16:58:28 +0100 >> > >> > > I'm not so sure this is suitable for stable. It doesn't seem to be >> > > helpful to either userland or kernel code. >> > > >> > > In the kernel, we were checking that ver == 1 and type == 1 thus this >> > > wasn't hurting us. >> > > >> > > If userland does anything more with these fields then it's probably >> > > already working around the swapped fields. It can work with both old >> > > and new headers by doing: >> > >> > It's up to you, I would rather have the corrected version propagated >> > as soon as possible. But that's just me. >> >> Let's see what Greg thinks. > > I'm guessing that Linus's tree is also "wrong" here, correct? If so, > the fix that goes into that tree should also go here as well. > > Or am I confused? Linus's tree has had this change for a full release. It went into 3.10 It's correcting a mistake that has been there since the header file even existed.