Re: Patch "net: refactor bind_bucket fastreuse into helper" has been added to the 4.14-stable tree

[Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>]

On Tue, Aug 18, 2020 at 09:11:36AM +0200, Matthieu Baerts wrote:
> On 18/08/2020 09:08, Greg KH wrote:
> > On Mon, Aug 17, 2020 at 09:28:48PM +0200, Matthieu Baerts wrote:
> > > Hi Greg,
> > > 
> > > On 17/08/2020 11:59, gregkh@linuxfoundation.org wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > This is a note to let you know that I've just added the patch titled
> > > > 
> > > >       net: refactor bind_bucket fastreuse into helper
> > > > 
> > > > to the 4.14-stable tree which can be found at:
> > > >       http://www.kernel.org/git/?p=linux/kernel/git/stable/stable-queue.git;a=summary
> > > > 
> > > > The filename of the patch is:
> > > >        net-refactor-bind_bucket-fastreuse-into-helper.patch
> > > > and it can be found in the queue-4.14 subdirectory.
> > > > 
> > > > If you, or anyone else, feels it should not be added to the stable tree,
> > > > please let <stable@vger.kernel.org> know about it.
> > > 
> > > (...)
> > > 
> > > > Patches currently in stable-queue which might be from tim.froidcoeur@tessares.net are
> > > > 
> > > > queue-4.14/net-refactor-bind_bucket-fastreuse-into-helper.patch
> > > 
> > > Thank you for backporting this patch!
> > > 
> > > It seems the backport of the companion patch -- d76f3351cea2 ("net:
> > > initialize fastreuse on inet_inherit_port") -- was lost somewhere for 4.14
> > > version. It was backported in all other newer stable versions: 5.8, 5.7,
> > > 5.4, 4.19 but not in 4.14.
> > > The patch backported here is a preparation for the real fix which is the
> > > missing patch.
> > > 
> > > I guess the intention is to backport d76f3351cea2 to v4.14 as well. If not,
> > > this refactoring is maybe not needed :)
> > 
> > Ugh, that was my fault, thanks for catching this.  I've now queued this
> > up to 4.14.y.
> 
> Thank you for having added it!
> 
> All these backported patches look good to me!

Thanks for checking.

I stopped at 4.14.y as the code for 4.9.y and 4.4.y changed a bunch in
this area, do you think it's worth doing the backport to those really
old kernels?  If not, no big deal, I figured I would ask, as I couldn't
tell how realistic devices running them would hit this issue.

thanks,

greg k-h