From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751293AbdCRJeX (ORCPT ); Sat, 18 Mar 2017 05:34:23 -0400 Received: from mail-lf0-f66.google.com ([209.85.215.66]:35025 "EHLO mail-lf0-f66.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750990AbdCRJeV (ORCPT ); Sat, 18 Mar 2017 05:34:21 -0400 Date: Sat, 18 Mar 2017 10:13:31 +0100 From: Johan Hovold To: Dmitry Torokhov Cc: Johan Hovold , Oliver Neukum , linux-input@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-usb@vger.kernel.org, Greg Kroah-Hartman Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/7] Input: fix NULL-derefs at probe Message-ID: <20170318091331.GG20622@localhost> References: <20170313123539.28103-1-johan@kernel.org> <1489418118.30110.26.camel@suse.com> <20170313154552.GT4211@localhost> <20170316223728.GC2935@dtor-ws> <20170317105337.GD20622@localhost> <20170317210315.GC26166@dtor-ws> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20170317210315.GC26166@dtor-ws> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.24 (2015-08-30) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Mar 17, 2017 at 02:03:15PM -0700, Dmitry Torokhov wrote: > On Fri, Mar 17, 2017 at 11:53:37AM +0100, Johan Hovold wrote: > > On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 03:37:28PM -0700, Dmitry Torokhov wrote: > > > On Mon, Mar 13, 2017 at 04:45:52PM +0100, Johan Hovold wrote: > > > > On Mon, Mar 13, 2017 at 04:15:18PM +0100, Oliver Neukum wrote: > > > > > Am Montag, den 13.03.2017, 13:35 +0100 schrieb Johan Hovold: > > > > > > This series fixes a number of NULL-pointer dereferences due to > > > > > > missing endpoint sanity checks that can be triggered by a > > > > > > malicious USB device. > > > > > Applied the lot. > > > > I noticed you dropped the Fixes tag from the patches that fix bugs which > > predate git. While this is probably not much of an issue in this case, I > > think it's generally a bad idea since we're loosing information this > > way, and this specifically makes it harder for the stable maintainers to > > figure out which tree to backport a fix to. > > As far as I know the rule is: if no special markings then stable patch > should be applied as far as it can go. That's true for the stable tag itself, yes. > There is no reason to say specify 2.6.12 commit, as in fact the > offending change is likely to be even earlier, so the annotation would > be effectively wrong. It is still the first git commit which has the bug, and everyone (dealing with code forensics) knows that 1da177e4c3f4 ("Linux-2.6.12-rc2") is special. Adding a Fixes-tag pointing to that initial commit, makes it clear that bug has indeed been tracked as far back as reasonable. Omission of a Fixes-tag could on the other hand be due to the submitter not bothering to track the offending commit, thereby leaving it up to a stable maintainer to do so (if only just be sure). Thanks, Johan