On Wed, Aug 14, 2024 at 11:46:30AM +0200, Christian Heusel wrote:
On 24/08/08 11:52AM, Christian Heusel wrote:
On 24/08/08 08:38AM, Greg KH wrote:
On Wed, Aug 07, 2024 at 08:34:48PM +0200, Christian Heusel wrote:
On 24/08/07 04:12PM, Greg KH wrote:
On Mon, Aug 05, 2024 at 09:28:29PM +0000, avladu@cloudbasesolutions.com wrote:
Hello,
This patch needs to be backported to the stable 6.1.x and 6.64.x branches, as the initial patch https://github.com/torvalds/linux/commit/e269d79c7d35aa3808b1f3c1737d63dab50... was backported a few days ago: https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/stable/linux.git/commit/incl... https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/stable/linux.git/commit/incl...
Please provide a working backport, the change does not properly cherry-pick.
greg k-h
Hey Greg, hey Sasha,
this patch also needs backporting to the 6.6.y and 6.10.y series as the buggy commit was backported to to all three series.
What buggy commit?
The issue is that commit e269d79c7d35 ("net: missing check virtio") introduces a bug which is fixed by 89add40066f9 ("net: drop bad gso csum_start and offset in virtio_net_hdr") which it also carries a "Fixes:" tag for.
Therefore it would be good to also get 89add40066f9 backported.
And how was this tested, it does not apply cleanly to the trees for me at all.
I have tested this with the procedure as described in [0]:
$ git switch linux-6.10.y $ git cherry-pick -x 89add40066f9ed9abe5f7f886fe5789ff7e0c50e Auto-merging net/ipv4/udp_offload.c [linux-6.10.y fbc0d2bea065] net: drop bad gso csum_start and offset in virtio_net_hdr Author: Willem de Bruijn <willemb@google.com> Date: Mon Jul 29 16:10:12 2024 -0400 3 files changed, 12 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)This also works for linux-6.6.y, but not for linux-6.1.y, as it fails with a merge error there.
The relevant commit is confirmed to fix the issue in the relevant Githu issue here[1]:
@marek22k commented > They both fix the problem for me.confused,
Sorry for the confusion! I hope the above clears things up a little :)
greg k-h
Cheers, Christian
Since I didn't hear from anybody so far about the above issue it's a bit unclear on how to proceed here. I still think that I would make sense to go with my above suggestion about patching at least 2 out of the 3 stable series where the patch applies cleanly.
~ Chris
Do what Greg said:
Please provide a working backport, the change does not properly cherry-pick.
that means, post backported patches to stable, copy list.