From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <SRS0=PwF/=QN=vger.kernel.org=netdev-owner@kernel.org>
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on
	aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.5 required=3.0 tests=DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,DKIM_SIGNED,
	DKIM_VALID,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_PASS,
	USER_AGENT_MUTT autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0
Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99])
	by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C85C6C169C4
	for <netdev@archiver.kernel.org>; Wed,  6 Feb 2019 16:29:48 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67])
	by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 98B43218AD
	for <netdev@archiver.kernel.org>; Wed,  6 Feb 2019 16:29:48 +0000 (UTC)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org;
	s=default; t=1549470588;
	bh=OhLCb7vyuU9KELh8eGUUDx+JvuIg4RxISIy25TLw3Ac=;
	h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:List-ID:From;
	b=yJ1VfpdsofRKGyH+pEbp5C/zmlw8gIZo3VfyAZO7ctG+IyM5kwhlyv6socGjqbLC0
	 CIiEaTmoEMBMS/yrVAUJrhjgShYliOBFT72gaBQjX0tyqEomnPsyd5Uffa0qI3I8fw
	 ncqvMBkg4atGw5C2Hg/C6ajeNBpC8iWq1Vp69lgY=
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
        id S1731061AbfBFQ3r (ORCPT <rfc822;netdev@archiver.kernel.org>);
        Wed, 6 Feb 2019 11:29:47 -0500
Received: from mail.kernel.org ([198.145.29.99]:34996 "EHLO mail.kernel.org"
        rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
        id S1726306AbfBFQ3q (ORCPT <rfc822;netdev@vger.kernel.org>);
        Wed, 6 Feb 2019 11:29:46 -0500
Received: from localhost (mobile-166-177-186-135.mycingular.net [166.177.186.135])
        (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits))
        (No client certificate requested)
        by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id B7747218AE;
        Wed,  6 Feb 2019 16:29:44 +0000 (UTC)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org;
        s=default; t=1549470585;
        bh=OhLCb7vyuU9KELh8eGUUDx+JvuIg4RxISIy25TLw3Ac=;
        h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From;
        b=EQ54fUlYOKxvXctquYueimguIW1g+EZ0htkDgSEMgsBkjKG9phmcucX8eag792N1N
         wHxoBFs8aXY//oEEWnl61roR7AFKYO8hA5K4tTL7OcWxKnMsTbkn7FBH+UBY/ZuFT5
         8e0D5DDOwQ8Fl1LlWyjBcTrCSTpLfqAfsI5EGgBw=
Date:   Wed, 6 Feb 2019 17:29:38 +0100
From:   Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
To:     Maciej =?utf-8?Q?=C5=BBenczykowski?= <zenczykowski@gmail.com>
Cc:     Benedict Wong <benedictwong@google.com>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@google.com>,
        Linux NetDev <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
        Nathan Harold <nharold@google.com>,
        Lorenzo Colitti <lorenzo@google.com>,
        Steffen Klassert <steffen.klassert@secunet.com>,
        Eyal Birger <eyal.birger@gmail.com>, tobias@strongswan.org
Subject: Re: [xfrm, backport request] Request backport of e2612cd496e7 -
 set-mark backwards compatibility
Message-ID: <20190206162938.GB22989@kroah.com>
References: <CANrj0bbjjtczU=Bk86y4hn=BX0pc0SQtKDLVwBJ4jihcC9JU2Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <CANP3RGcdptMfnJXQNjNdiD4kuoZxj4vETro_aWRQqzsxY=yAfQ@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
In-Reply-To: <CANP3RGcdptMfnJXQNjNdiD4kuoZxj4vETro_aWRQqzsxY=yAfQ@mail.gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.11.3 (2019-02-01)
Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk
List-ID: <netdev.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: netdev@vger.kernel.org

On Tue, Feb 05, 2019 at 02:54:29PM -0800, Maciej Żenczykowski wrote:
> > I propose backporting commit e2612cd496e7 ("xfrm: Make set-mark default
> > behavior backward compatible") to 4.19 and 4.20 kernels to fix a backwards
> > compatibility bug introduced in 9b42c1f179a6 (“xfrm: Extend the
> > output_mark to support input direction and masking”).
> >
> > The fix is small, relatively simple, and has unit tests. :)
> >
> > Without this change, systems using mark-based routing on 4.19 or 4.20
> > kernels will by fail to route IPsec tunnel mode packets correctly in the
> > default case. This specifically affects Android devices.
> 
> Looks like it already includes a 'fixes: sha1' tag.
> I'm not sure what causes these patches to get picked up for stable...
> I'm guessing it's some sort of Greg-fu-style-magic...?

<formletter>

This is not the correct way to submit patches for inclusion in the
stable kernel tree.  Please read:
    https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/process/stable-kernel-rules.html
for how to do this properly.

</formletter>

Hint, putting a fixes tag there does NOT trigger my scripts...