Arnd Bergmann <a...@arndb.de> writes:
> On Fri, May 19, 2017 at 7:18 AM, Kalle Valo <kv...@codeaurora.org> wrote:
>> Arnd Bergmann <a...@arndb.de> writes:
>>> I've managed to split up my long patch into a series of reasonble
>>> steps now.
>>> The first two are required to fix a regression from commit 41977e86c984
>>> ("rt2x00: add support for MT7620"), the rest are just cleanups to
>>> have a consistent state across all the register access functions.
>> Can these all go to 4.13 or would you prefer me to push the first two
>> 4.12? Or what?
> I think you can reasonably argue either way: the second patch does
> fix a real bug that may or may not lead to an exploitable stack overflow
> when CONFIG_KASAN is enabled, which would be a reason to put it
> into 4.12. On the other hand, I have another 20 patches for similar
> (or worse) stack overflow issues with KASAN that I'm hoping to all
> get into 4.13 and backported into stable kernel later if necessary,
> so we could treat this one like the others.
> The only difference between this and the others is that in rt2x00 it
> is a regression against 4.11, while the others have all been present
> for a long time.
Having all of these in 4.12 sounds a bit excessive and splitting the set
(the first two into 4.12 and the rest into 4.13) sounds too much work.
So I would prefer to queue these to 4.13, if it's ok for everyone?