From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-18.8 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,INCLUDES_CR_TRAILER,INCLUDES_PATCH, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,MENTIONS_GIT_HOSTING,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1C66FC43214 for ; Wed, 1 Sep 2021 09:30:46 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F0674610A2 for ; Wed, 1 Sep 2021 09:30:45 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S243632AbhIAJbj (ORCPT ); Wed, 1 Sep 2021 05:31:39 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:44384 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S243514AbhIAJbh (ORCPT ); Wed, 1 Sep 2021 05:31:37 -0400 Received: from mail.monkeyblade.net (shards.monkeyblade.net [IPv6:2620:137:e000::1:9]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4A3E3C061575; Wed, 1 Sep 2021 02:30:41 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (cpc147930-brnt3-2-0-cust60.4-2.cable.virginm.net [86.15.196.61]) by mail.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id AE0FA4CE6846B; Wed, 1 Sep 2021 02:30:38 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 01 Sep 2021 10:30:33 +0100 (BST) Message-Id: <20210901.103033.925382819044968737.davem@davemloft.net> To: yun.wang@linux.alibaba.com Cc: paul@paul-moore.com, kuba@kernel.org, yoshfuji@linux-ipv6.org, dsahern@kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] net: fix NULL pointer reference in cipso_v4_doi_free From: David Miller In-Reply-To: <1ed31e79-809b-7ac9-2760-869570ac22ea@linux.alibaba.com> References: <84262e7b-fda6-9d7d-b0bd-1bb0e945e6f9@linux.alibaba.com> <1ed31e79-809b-7ac9-2760-869570ac22ea@linux.alibaba.com> X-Mailer: Mew version 6.8 on Emacs 27.2 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=iso-2022-jp Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Greylist: Sender succeeded SMTP AUTH, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.6.2 (mail.monkeyblade.net [0.0.0.0]); Wed, 01 Sep 2021 02:30:40 -0700 (PDT) Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org From: 王贇 Date: Wed, 1 Sep 2021 09:51:28 +0800 > > > On 2021/8/31 下午9:48, Paul Moore wrote: >> On Mon, Aug 30, 2021 at 10:42 PM 王贇 wrote: >>> On 2021/8/31 上午12:50, Paul Moore wrote: >>> [SNIP] >>>>>>> Reported-by: Abaci >>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Michael Wang >>>>>>> --- >>>>>>> net/netlabel/netlabel_cipso_v4.c | 4 ++-- >>>>>>> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) >>>>>> >>>>>> I see this was already merged, but it looks good to me, thanks for >>>>>> making those changes. >>>>> >>>>> FWIW it looks like v1 was also merged: >>>>> >>>>> https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/netdev/net.git/commit/?id=733c99ee8b >>>> >>>> Yeah, that is unfortunate, there was a brief discussion about that >>>> over on one of the -stable patches for the v1 patch (odd that I never >>>> saw a patchbot post for the v1 patch?). Having both merged should be >>>> harmless, but we want to revert the v1 patch as soon as we can. >>>> Michael, can you take care of this? >>> >>> As v1 already merged, may be we could just goon with it? >>> >>> Actually both working to fix the problem, v1 will cover all the >>> cases, v2 take care one case since that's currently the only one, >>> but maybe there will be more in future. >> >> No. Please revert v1 and stick with the v2 patch. The v1 patch is in >> my opinion a rather ugly hack that addresses the symptom of the >> problem and not the root cause. >> >> It isn't your fault that both v1 and v2 were merged, but I'm asking >> you to help cleanup the mess. If you aren't able to do that please >> let us know so that others can fix this properly. > > No problem I can help on that, just try to make sure it's not a > meaningless work. > > So would it be fine to send out a v3 which revert v1 and apply v2? Please don't do things this way just send the relative change. Thanks.