From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from frasgout.his.huawei.com (frasgout.his.huawei.com [185.176.79.56]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 712E112F5B3; Thu, 9 May 2024 12:15:20 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=185.176.79.56 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1715256924; cv=none; b=WC9ak9MUo0smBj8ZNDS4rIa3hHBi2XP6E+JyHg3xvqEpKG6UcE+ObdTi4dxmMpfAJqm+zugaFMdN+FsewIDwGcGxGUf6yFMoHpH5Eq20GOn6MF9WHxB3tDuZ9vvX2EDxuWnAqu/WTIwD/s3smOjSDUwEkxgztH40UIwLy2pnynY= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1715256924; c=relaxed/simple; bh=zWT3ymlFxwD1jj5/NTWP2UJ28d/C7S3KjCv0sFfGABM=; h=Date:From:To:CC:Subject:Message-ID:In-Reply-To:References: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=aLcZETkR9YwfBgb510umLjLvdIBQ7FeZ4wJHOvYr4KE1tLd37bS6QBE4pAxnri2mAm/SHQuJdwmGIVx1ghQtiGC+bY+8dXPIUEtF/YhFm96SfwAkLE+r82cMopSdZv+EWgD8a3kf1LIm5RDP4hxUdUJfdn003dQjJOkpaiw+CBc= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=Huawei.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=huawei.com; arc=none smtp.client-ip=185.176.79.56 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=Huawei.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=huawei.com Received: from mail.maildlp.com (unknown [172.18.186.231]) by frasgout.his.huawei.com (SkyGuard) with ESMTP id 4VZrVR1JScz6JB46; Thu, 9 May 2024 20:12:15 +0800 (CST) Received: from lhrpeml500005.china.huawei.com (unknown [7.191.163.240]) by mail.maildlp.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 79801140B33; Thu, 9 May 2024 20:15:17 +0800 (CST) Received: from localhost (10.202.227.76) by lhrpeml500005.china.huawei.com (7.191.163.240) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.1.2507.39; Thu, 9 May 2024 13:15:17 +0100 Date: Thu, 9 May 2024 13:15:16 +0100 From: Jonathan Cameron To: Matti Vaittinen CC: Jonathan Cameron , Matti Vaittinen , Lars-Peter Clausen , , , Chenyuan Yang Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/2] Fix the iio-gts-helpers available times table sorting Message-ID: <20240509131516.000049d4@Huawei.com> In-Reply-To: References: <20240505185027.18809bfd@jic23-huawei> <11a16488-7f5f-4d53-a091-9cedcab76dc8@gmail.com> <20240506135356.7babe20f@jic23-huawei> Organization: Huawei Technologies Research and Development (UK) Ltd. X-Mailer: Claws Mail 4.1.0 (GTK 3.24.33; x86_64-w64-mingw32) Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-iio@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-ClientProxiedBy: lhrpeml100002.china.huawei.com (7.191.160.241) To lhrpeml500005.china.huawei.com (7.191.163.240) On Tue, 7 May 2024 09:14:15 +0300 Matti Vaittinen wrote: > On 5/6/24 15:53, Jonathan Cameron wrote: > > On Mon, 6 May 2024 08:09:27 +0300 > > Matti Vaittinen wrote: > > > >> On 5/5/24 20:50, Jonathan Cameron wrote: > >>> On Tue, 30 Apr 2024 15:44:26 +0300 > >>> Matti Vaittinen wrote: > >>> > >>>> Fix the available times table sorting in iio-gts-helpers > >>>> > >>>> This series contains a fix and test for the sorting of the available times in > >>>> IIO-gts helpers. Fix was originally developed and posted by Chenyuan Yang. > >>>> > >>>> Revision history: > >>>> v1 => v2: > >>>> - Fix the sender for patch 1/2 (Sic!) > >>>> - Fix Co-Developed-by tag (drop this from Chenyuan who > >>>> is the original author) > >>>> - Fix the From: tag as instructed in: > >>>> https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/process/submitting-patches.html > >>> > >>> Am I right in thinking this doesn't matter for existing drivers? > >> > >> I think this is right. Only couple of in-tree drivers are using these > >> helpers for now, and all of them sorted the tables already in driver. > >> > >>> As such not high priority for back porting? > >> > >> The bug is pretty nasty as it causes invalid memory accesses. Hence I'd > >> like to see this landing in the longterm kernels. It seems to me the GTS > >> helpers got merged in 6.4, so getting the fix backported to 6.6 might > >> make sense. > >> > >>> I'll assume that and queue it up for 6.11. If someone shouts I can pull the fix > >>> forwards, but then we have the mess of chasing the testing in later. > >> > >> I am sorry Jonathan but I'm not quite sure what you mean by "pulling fix > >> forward", or what is the "mess of chasing the testing in later" :) > > > > Hmm. That was an odd choice of words :) I just meant that I could send > > the fix in the first set of fixes after 6.10-rc1 rather than waiting for 6.11. > > Oh, right :) > > > For now I'll leave it queued for 6.11 on the basis there are a lot of ways > > a driver writer can cause similar out of bounds accesses and they should > > notice it not working during testing. So it 'should' not be a problem to > > not rush this in. > > > > I guess this means the 6.10 won't have the fix? I believe this is fine - > assuming the 6.10 is not going to be an LTS. Thanks for taking care of > this! :) It may well get backported anyway, but after 6.11 merge window. J > > Yours, > -- Matti > >