From: Greg KH <[email protected]> Date: Mon, 8 Oct 2012 13:27:47 -0700
> 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? It looks like I might have bolixed things up, I'll check it out when I get in front of the machine where I created those mboxes tonight. Thanks. -- 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
