On Wed 10-10-12 16:37:23, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 09, 2012 at 06:10:01PM -0300, Herton Ronaldo Krzesinski wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > please consider adding the commit in subject, "udf: fix retun value on
> > error path in udf_load_logicalvol" (commit 68766a2), to the stable
> > versions in the subject, since it is a bug fix related with the
> > following two changes included in them:
> >
> > udf: Avoid run away loop when partition table length is corrupted
> > commit adee11b2085bee90bd8f4f52123ffb07882d6256 upstream.
>
> But this showed up in 3.4, so why would the patch be applicable to older
> kernels than that?
>
> > udf: Fortify loading of sparing table
> > commit 1df2ae31c724e57be9d7ac00d78db8a5dabdd050 upstream.
>
> This shows up in 3.5.
>
> So I'm confused, why would we want 68766a2 in 3.4? and 3.2 and 3.0?
Well, but both of the above patches (i.e.
adee11b2085bee90bd8f4f52123ffb07882d6256 and
1df2ae31c724e57be9d7ac00d78db8a5dabdd050) were included in 3.2.23 (I didn't
check 3.0-stable) so including 68766a2 in 3.2-stable makes sense as well.
> 3.5 is EOL after this next release, so is it worth adding it to just
> that tree now?
Regarding 3.5-stable, I'm not decided. It's not really *that* serious
issue...
Honza
--
Jan Kara <[email protected]>
SUSE Labs, CR
--
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
