On Mon, Oct 08, 2012 at 04:21:14PM -0400, David Miller wrote:
> From: Greg KH <[email protected]>
> Date: Mon, 8 Oct 2012 13:11:56 -0700
>
> > On Mon, Oct 08, 2012 at 09:59:50PM +0200, Mathias Krause wrote:
> >> Hi Greg,
> >>
> >> On Mon, Oct 8, 2012 at 8:12 PM, <[email protected]> wrote:
> >> >
> >> > This is a note to let you know that I've just added the patch titled
> >> >
> >> > xfrm_user: ensure user supplied esn replay window is valid
> >> >
> >> > to the 3.0-stable tree which can be found at:
> >> >
> >> > http://www.kernel.org/git/?p=linux/kernel/git/stable/stable-queue.git;a=summary
> >> >
> >> > The filename of the patch is:
> >> > xfrm_user-ensure-user-supplied-esn-replay-window-is-valid.patch
> >> > and it can be found in the queue-3.0 subdirectory.
> >> >
> >>
> >> any specific reason you queued it for 3.0 and 3.4 but not for 3.5?
> >
> > Because it was not in the set of networking patches that David Miller
> > sent to me for the 3.5.y kernel tree.
>
> That patch should have been in every set I sent you.
>
> I'm not on the machine where I produced those mbox's at the moment,
> and I can't find a reliable linux-stable list archive, so I can't
> check to see what happened at the moment.
The only "esn" patches I see in the net_35.mbox are the following:
24 N Sep 19 Mathias Krause ( 52) [PATCH 11/34] xfrm_user: don't
copy esn replay window twice for new states
32 N Sep 04 Steffen Klasser ( 104) [PATCH 03/34] xfrm: Workaround
incompatibility of ESN and async crypto
Did I mess something up here?
greg k-h
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe stable" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
