From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail.kernel.org ([198.145.29.99]:55714 "EHLO mail.kernel.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752223AbeEQP72 (ORCPT ); Thu, 17 May 2018 11:59:28 -0400 Date: Thu, 17 May 2018 17:59:08 +0200 From: Greg KH To: Stefan Schmidt Cc: Stefan Schmidt , stable@vger.kernel.org, Alexander Aring , "David S. Miller" , "linux-wpan@vger.kernel.org" , Network Development Subject: Re: net: ieee802154: 6lowpan: fix frag reassembly Message-ID: <20180517155908.GA4831@kroah.com> References: <142208d4-6ca6-5923-327c-8d1cb069ceb8@osg.samsung.com> <20180517085919.GD25318@kroah.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: stable-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Thu, May 17, 2018 at 04:16:20PM +0200, Stefan Schmidt wrote: > Hello Greg. > > On 17.05.2018 10:59, Greg KH wrote: > > On Mon, May 14, 2018 at 05:22:18PM +0200, Stefan Schmidt wrote: > >> Hello. > >> > >> > >> Please apply f18fa5de5ba7f1d6650951502bb96a6e4715a948 > >> > >> (net: ieee802154: 6lowpan: fix frag reassembly) to the 4.16.x stable tree. > >> > >> > >> Earlier trees are not needed as the problem was introduced in 4.16. > > > > Really? Commit f18fa5de5ba7 ("net: ieee802154: 6lowpan: fix frag > > reassembly") says it fixes commit 648700f76b03 ("inet: frags: use > > rhashtables for reassembly units") which did not show up until 4.17-rc1: > > $ git describe --contains 648700f76b03 > > v4.17-rc1~148^2~20^2~11 > > > > Also, it did not get backported to 4.16.y, so I don't see how it is > > needed in 4.16-stable. > > I guess its time to blush on my side. During the bisection for the > commit that introduced the problem I came to the point where it was > clear to me that it was already in 4.16. This was a while back I have > have honestly no idea how I did this mistake. > > I tested again now with plain 4.16 and it works fine. > The fix is also in 4.17-rcX where it actually is needed. In the end I am > glad that it was not introduced and slipped me in an earlier release. > > > To verify this, I tried applying the patch, and it totally fails to > > apply to the 4.16.y tree. > > > > So are you _sure_ you want/need this in 4.16? If so, can you provide a > > working backport that you have verified works? > > No backport needed. I simply screwed up when verifying this for 4.16. > I put on the hat of shame for today and will try harder the next time. Hey, not a problem, thanks for verifying, 'git describe --contains' is your friend :) thanks, greg k-h