On Fri, Jun 26, 2020 at 04:04:13PM +0200, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
On Wed, Jun 17, 2020 at 04:53:08PM -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote:
Upstream commit 64611a15ca9d ("dm crypt: avoid truncating the logical block size") upstream: v5.8-rc1 Fixes: ad6bf88a6c19 ("block: fix an integer overflow in logical block size") in linux-4.4.y: b8cd70b724f0 in linux-4.9.y: 5dbde467ccd6 in linux-4.14.y: 0c7a7d8e62bd in linux-4.19.y: a7f79052d1af in linux-5.4.y: 6eed26e35cfd upstream: v5.5-rc7 Affected branches: linux-4.4.y (conflicts - backport needed) linux-4.9.y (conflicts - backport needed) linux-4.14.y linux-4.19.y linux-5.4.y linux-5.6.y linux-5.7.y
Can you provide a backport for this?
That one is easy: 4.9.y and 4.4.y are not affected even though ad6bf88a6c19 has been applied there. Reason is that 64611a15ca9d only applies if bc9e9cf0401f1 ("dm crypt: don't decrease device limits") is in the tree. This in turn is a fix for 8f0009a22517 ("dm crypt: optionally support larger encryption sector size"). None of those is in v4.4.y/v4.9.y.
Upstream commit 2f02fd3fa13e ("fanotify: fix ignore mask logic for events on child and on dir") upstream: v5.8-rc1 Fixes: b469e7e47c8a ("fanotify: fix handling of events on child sub-directory") in linux-4.9.y: 987d8ff3a2d8 in linux-4.14.y: 515160e3c4f2 in linux-4.19.y: 20663629f6ae upstream: v4.20-rc3 Affected branches: linux-4.9.y (conflicts - backport needed) linux-4.14.y (conflicts - backport needed) linux-4.19.y linux-5.4.y (already applied) linux-5.6.y (already applied) linux-5.7.y (already applied)
Do you have a backport?
I _think_ this doesn't apply either because it also depends on 837a393438475 ("fanotify: generalize fanotify_should_send_event()") which is not in v4.14.y and earlier, but I may be wrong. That code isn't exactly easy to understand.
For all other patches you listed, I've queued up the missing ones, some already got merged since you sent this out.
Thanks!
Guenter