Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <c6864908-d093-1705-76ce-94d6af85e092@linux.alibaba.com>
 <18f0171e-0cc8-6ae6-d04a-a69a2a3c1a39@linux.alibaba.com> <CAHC9VhTEs9E+ZeGGp96NnOhmr-6MZLXf6ckHeG8w5jh3AfgKiQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <20210830094525.3c97e460@kicinski-fedora-pc1c0hjn.dhcp.thefacebook.com>
 <CAHC9VhRHx=+Fek7W4oyZWVBUENQ8VnD+mWXUytKPKg+9p-J4LQ@mail.gmail.com> <84262e7b-fda6-9d7d-b0bd-1bb0e945e6f9@linux.alibaba.com>
In-Reply-To: <84262e7b-fda6-9d7d-b0bd-1bb0e945e6f9@linux.alibaba.com>
From:   Paul Moore <paul@paul-moore.com>
Date:   Tue, 31 Aug 2021 09:48:00 -0400
Message-ID: <CAHC9VhRPUa-oD_85j6RcAVvp7sLZQEAGGapYYP1fEt7Ax5LMfA@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] net: fix NULL pointer reference in cipso_v4_doi_free
To:     =?UTF-8?B?546L6LSH?= <yun.wang@linux.alibaba.com>
Cc:     Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
        Hideaki YOSHIFUJI <yoshfuji@linux-ipv6.org>,
        David Ahern <dsahern@kernel.org>, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Precedence: bulk

On Mon, Aug 30, 2021 at 10:42 PM =E7=8E=8B=E8=B4=87 <yun.wang@linux.alibaba=
.com> wrote:
> On 2021/8/31 =E4=B8=8A=E5=8D=8812:50, Paul Moore wrote:
> [SNIP]
> >>>> Reported-by: Abaci <abaci@linux.alibaba.com>
> >>>> Signed-off-by: Michael Wang <yun.wang@linux.alibaba.com>
> >>>> ---
> >>>>  net/netlabel/netlabel_cipso_v4.c | 4 ++--
> >>>>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> >>>
> >>> I see this was already merged, but it looks good to me, thanks for
> >>> making those changes.
> >>
> >> FWIW it looks like v1 was also merged:
> >>
> >> https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/netdev/net.git/commit/=
?id=3D733c99ee8b
> >
> > Yeah, that is unfortunate, there was a brief discussion about that
> > over on one of the -stable patches for the v1 patch (odd that I never
> > saw a patchbot post for the v1 patch?).  Having both merged should be
> > harmless, but we want to revert the v1 patch as soon as we can.
> > Michael, can you take care of this?
>
> As v1 already merged, may be we could just goon with it?
>
> Actually both working to fix the problem, v1 will cover all the
> cases, v2 take care one case since that's currently the only one,
> but maybe there will be more in future.

No.  Please revert v1 and stick with the v2 patch.  The v1 patch is in
my opinion a rather ugly hack that addresses the symptom of the
problem and not the root cause.

It isn't your fault that both v1 and v2 were merged, but I'm asking
you to help cleanup the mess.  If you aren't able to do that please
let us know so that others can fix this properly.

--=20
paul moore
www.paul-moore.com