From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from galois.linutronix.de (Galois.linutronix.de [193.142.43.55]) (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 6B42022E41D; Mon, 17 Mar 2025 14:08:54 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=193.142.43.55 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1742220536; cv=none; b=FwbZL5lTe1yNq18lMn2Gf3dJTKEdBZflJevoJO1PKn5r9HWkeFU6VlBz7WKAORc6WHGnj5cmHFMSv0Dg707APXeJOdGgZlmv1RiIHhMxnEdZAj0yRcCyHhBLOCcHCP9OVdYAsgyidIG47DMSBA1QkdJfl+J7O5NIqKapzyR2rBU= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1742220536; c=relaxed/simple; bh=LaBllksMXNcHn9jcIH65hwRzMgxWyFEhpdNoPDS8o4M=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=p6cBQHmxvDjSCx+Ond+ZsDbbFIEDVPEivbo/7Udmp+Qfut0S6ubdhDKnMm/CbgBqBEBPgQYw5qdV4dt11XLki+atVRvMJxfCf1jqHrLtoYSKxvFpvaRcSxSHe//1s+7YVK1yeDR4tzXdCnrEcamQ4/eWqwzVgyzWT/VlC3He/6Y= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linutronix.de; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linutronix.de; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=linutronix.de header.i=@linutronix.de header.b=28W/+NQd; dkim=permerror (0-bit key) header.d=linutronix.de header.i=@linutronix.de header.b=FZuxdFD+; arc=none smtp.client-ip=193.142.43.55 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linutronix.de Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linutronix.de Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=linutronix.de header.i=@linutronix.de header.b="28W/+NQd"; dkim=permerror (0-bit key) header.d=linutronix.de header.i=@linutronix.de header.b="FZuxdFD+" Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2025 15:08:49 +0100 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linutronix.de; s=2020; t=1742220532; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=+VmJSsk64HA0bX+prW9/tesp5wyAHGS66/Z9Jcapr34=; b=28W/+NQdCpo9WjR9RGG7NwmtBraaBCW+jXmjkTxWvOwnmGczMH/urrf/4t3o71lDB6uP0s MZm4oWIh0M0lH7cphRgV+TfXMpY36hUasSUfoyCWU1goy/zhPdI2J81ZwbEWtO7F/rpo3t AnctrlF+/7sIH1pSt0W2ncsrqbu66yJu09wqsVHmdUXvgUq1g7a/8cdOhH4QVHwFgqgOKO BS0u+5ZlBL+DmxLvhVOQJ5uN1sk7M5dXTHJsm5MGt2nmrifWPs+VKMP7+ZT74hxStJR4RT CnCfZseTTD8k0PHrS8ssLKoycGbZFl6JpSYSVGq+EqyoQTcQ+z3hnd2NSDhN4g== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=ed25519-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linutronix.de; s=2020e; t=1742220532; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=+VmJSsk64HA0bX+prW9/tesp5wyAHGS66/Z9Jcapr34=; b=FZuxdFD+2Nr3gdbrCj+PMZO8cVs8PDeIgVhjzjRjn3XsN/g928yrG0t6SR/4vpEx9y1AzY 4qk8qNFfjN+KmeDQ== From: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior To: Greg KH Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org, bpf@vger.kernel.org, Ricardo =?utf-8?Q?Ca=C3=B1uelo?= Navarro , Alexei Starovoitov , Andrii Nakryiko , Daniel Borkmann , "David S. Miller" , Jakub Kicinski , Jesper Dangaard Brouer , John Fastabend , Thomas Gleixner , Toke =?utf-8?Q?H=C3=B8iland-J=C3=B8rgensen?= Subject: Re: [PATCH stable] xdp: Reset bpf_redirect_info before running a xdp's BPF prog. Message-ID: <20250317140849.H4eSnqFl@linutronix.de> References: <20250317133813.OwHVKUKe@linutronix.de> <2025031733-collide-dad-203a@gregkh> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: stable@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <2025031733-collide-dad-203a@gregkh> > > I added the commit introducing map redirects as the origin of the > > problem which is v4.14-rc1. The code is a bit different there it seems > > to work similar. > > What stable tree(s) is this for? Just 6.6.y? Why not older ones? I didn't say just v6.6.y. The commit introducing the problem is in v4.14-rc1 so I would say all the way down for the supported trees. Just let me know if it does not apply for some of the older kernel. > > Greg, feel free to decide if this is worth a CVE. > > That's not how CVEs are assigned :) > > If you want one, please read the in-tree documentation we have for that. I don't need one but it is tempting to go through the new process :). If it does not make your handling here easier (since you have two different patches for one issue) there is no need for it from my side. Thank you. > thanks, > > greg k-h Sebastian