Control: forwarded -1
https://lore.kernel.org/all/20220629224938.7760-1-didi.deb...@cknow.org/
On Wednesday, 29 June 2022 15:24:45 CEST Ben Hutchings wrote:
> Looks good to me. Can you send it on to sta...@vger.kernel.org?
> You'll need to add your Signed-off-by.
Done.
signature.asc
Processing control commands:
> forwarded -1
> https://lore.kernel.org/all/20220629224938.7760-1-didi.deb...@cknow.org/
Bug #1013299 [src:linux] linux-image-4.19.0-20-amd64: NULL pointer deref in
qdisc_put() due to missing backport
Set Bug forwarded-to-address to
On Wed, 2022-06-29 at 16:49 +0200, Diederik de Haas wrote:
> On Wednesday, 29 June 2022 15:24:45 CEST Ben Hutchings wrote:
> > Control: tag -1 patch
> > Control: tag -1 - help
> >
> > On Wed, 2022-06-22 at 11:47 +0200, Diederik de Haas wrote:
> > > On Tuesday, 21 June 2022 16:11:42 CEST Diederik
Diederik de Haas dixit:
>I proposed my patch to expedite things and (much) prefer that Thorsten would
I’m not the author…
>I can do it, but I would like Thorsten to test the patch and confirm it
It’s obviously correct, it moves the nil check to the correct place.
I tested “the reverse” by
On Wednesday, 29 June 2022 15:24:45 CEST Ben Hutchings wrote:
> Control: tag -1 patch
> Control: tag -1 - help
>
> On Wed, 2022-06-22 at 11:47 +0200, Diederik de Haas wrote:
> > On Tuesday, 21 June 2022 16:11:42 CEST Diederik de Haas wrote:
> > > > So yes, this needs to also be fixed upstream
Control: tag -1 patch
Control: tag -1 - help
On Wed, 2022-06-22 at 11:47 +0200, Diederik de Haas wrote:
> On Tuesday, 21 June 2022 16:11:42 CEST Diederik de Haas wrote:
> > > So yes, this needs to also be fixed upstream (hence me including that tag
> > > when reporbugging), but perhaps Debian can
Processing control commands:
> tag -1 patch
Bug #1013299 [src:linux] linux-image-4.19.0-20-amd64: NULL pointer deref in
qdisc_put() due to missing backport
Added tag(s) patch.
> tag -1 - help
Bug #1013299 [src:linux] linux-image-4.19.0-20-amd64: NULL pointer deref in
qdisc_put() due to missing
On Tuesday, 21 June 2022 16:11:42 CEST Diederik de Haas wrote:
> > So yes, this needs to also be fixed upstream (hence me including that tag
> > when reporbugging), but perhaps Debian can quickfix.
>
> What I have observed so far is that a commit needs to be accepted upstream
> (but doesn't have
Diederik de Haas dixit:
>I'm talking here about 4.9, not 4.19 ...
Ah sorry, I can’t keep them distinguished in my head apparently, or
it’s too hot…
>> $ git tag --contains 92833e8b5db6
>> v4.19.221
>> […]
>
>Thanks for that command :-) I usually went through several manual steps to
>figure out
On Tuesday, 21 June 2022 15:34:12 CEST Thorsten Glaser wrote:
> >In branch 'linux-4.9.y' there is no qdisc_put function, so the above check
> >seems rightly in qdisc_destroy there.
I'm talking here about 4.9, not 4.19 ...
> Not any more. Since…
>
> $ git tag --contains 92833e8b5db6
> v4.19.221
Diederik de Haas dixit:
>In branch 'linux-4.9.y' there is no qdisc_put function, so the above check
>seems rightly in qdisc_destroy there.
Not any more. Since…
$ git tag --contains 92833e8b5db6
v4.19.221
[…]
… qdisc_destroy was renamed to qdisc_put in 4.19, breaking modules (grr).
So yes,
Processing control commands:
> tag -1 help
Bug #1013299 [src:linux] linux-image-4.19.0-20-amd64: NULL pointer deref in
qdisc_put() due to missing backport
Added tag(s) help.
--
1013299: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1013299
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact
Control: tag -1 help
On Tuesday, 21 June 2022 13:35:09 CEST Thorsten Glaser wrote:
> >So I'm inclined to think that 92833e8b5db6c209e9311ac8c6a44d3bf1856659 is
> >the commit which brought the bug back.
>
> Yes, definitely. The lines…
>
> if (!qdisc)
> return;
>
> … from
Processing control commands:
> tag -1 - moreinfo
Bug #1013299 [src:linux] linux-image-4.19.0-20-amd64: NULL pointer deref in
qdisc_put() due to missing backport
Removed tag(s) moreinfo.
--
1013299: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1013299
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact
Control: tag -1 - moreinfo
Diederik de Haas dixit:
>In Debian, the release before 4.19.235-1 was 4.19.232-1 which should also have
>this bug. The release before that was 4.19.208-1, which shouldn't.
>Can you verify that?
Not easily any more, but I know it worked some weeks ago, and I *think*
I
Diederik de Haas dixit:
>It's a bit 'above my paygrade', but if qdisk_put() can accept a NULL pointer
>then I'm curious whether that would be allowed for other functions in that file
>as well ... there are several having "struct Qdisc *qdisc" as (only)
>parameter, but only qdisk_put() checks for
On dinsdag 21 juni 2022 11:49:26 CEST you wrote:
> https://lore.kernel.org/all/20190921063607.ga1083...@kroah.com/ is about the
> 4.19.75 release and that contains that change in commit
> 7a1bad565cebfbf6956f9bb36dba734a48fa31d4 titled "net_sched: let qdisc_put()
> accept NULL pointer" which
Processing control commands:
> tag -1 moreinfo
Bug #1013299 [src:linux] linux-image-4.19.0-20-amd64: NULL pointer deref in
qdisc_put() due to missing backport
Added tag(s) moreinfo.
--
1013299: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1013299
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact
Control: tag -1 moreinfo
On Tuesday, 21 June 2022 08:10:54 CEST Thorsten Glaser wrote:
> Package: src:linux
> Version: 4.19.235-1
> Severity: critical
> Tags: upstream
> Justification: breaks the whole system
>
> A recent upstream “stable” upgrade backported the removal of the
> qdisc_destroy()
Package: src:linux
Version: 4.19.235-1
Severity: critical
Tags: upstream
Justification: breaks the whole system
A recent upstream “stable” upgrade backported the removal of the
qdisc_destroy() function (which, in itself, is questionable enough
already and caused no small amount of fun) using
20 matches
Mail list logo
