On 11/19/24 15:25, Liam R. Howlett wrote:
- Greg KH gregkh@linuxfoundation.org [241119 09:17]:
On Mon, Nov 18, 2024 at 03:32:14PM -0500, Liam R. Howlett wrote:
Okay, before I get yelled at...
This commit is only necessary for 6.12.y until Lorenzo's other fixes to older stables land (and I'll have to figure out what to do in each).
The commit will not work on mm-unstable, because it doesn't exist due to refactoring.
The commit does not have a tag about "upstream commit" because there isn't one - the closest thing I could point to does not have a stable git id.
So here I am with a fix for a kernel that was released a few hours ago that is not necessary in v6.13, for a bug that's out there on syzkaller.
Also, it's very unlikely to happen unless you inject failures like syzkaller. But hey, pretty decent turn-around on finding a fix - so that's a rosy outlook.
Why isn't this needed in 6.13.y? What's going to be different in there that this isn't needed?
The code has been refactored and avoids the scenario. I'd name the refactoring commit as the upstream commit, but it does not have a stable git id as it's in mm-unstable. So I'm at a bit of a loss of how to follow the process.
Is it not in mm-stable now, given we're in a merge window? Anyway AFAIU if the stable-specific fix is completely different from the upstream refactoring, we don't even try to pretend it's the same "commit XYZ upstream" no?
Do you just want me to take this for the 6.12.y tree now? I'll be glad to, just confused a bit.
Yes, please.
Thanks, Liam