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> <7f239a0e-7a09-3dc0-43ce-27c19c7a309d@linux.alibaba.com>
 <4c000115-4069-5277-ce82-946f2fdb790a@linux.alibaba.com> <CAHC9VhRBhCfX45V701rbGsvmOPQ4Nyp7dX2GA6NL8FxnA9akXg@mail.gmail.com>
 <a53753dc-0cce-4f9a-cb97-fc790d30a234@linux.alibaba.com>
In-Reply-To: <a53753dc-0cce-4f9a-cb97-fc790d30a234@linux.alibaba.com>
From:   Paul Moore <paul@paul-moore.com>
Date:   Thu, 2 Sep 2021 22:15:42 -0400
Message-ID: <CAHC9VhR2c=HYdWmz-At0+7RexUBjQHktv3ypHmFU2jD5gDc2Cw@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Revert "net: fix NULL pointer reference in cipso_v4_doi_free"
To:     =?UTF-8?B?546L6LSH?= <yun.wang@linux.alibaba.com>
Cc:     "David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
        Hideaki YOSHIFUJI <yoshfuji@linux-ipv6.org>,
        David Ahern <dsahern@kernel.org>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@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 Wed, Sep 1, 2021 at 10:37 PM =E7=8E=8B=E8=B4=87 <yun.wang@linux.alibaba.=
com> wrote:
> On 2021/9/2 =E4=B8=8A=E5=8D=885:05, Paul Moore wrote:
> > On Tue, Aug 31, 2021 at 10:21 PM =E7=8E=8B=E8=B4=87 <yun.wang@linux.ali=
baba.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> Hi Paul, it confused me since it's the first time I face
> >> such situation, but I just realized what you're asking is
> >> actually this revert, correct?
> >
> > I believe DaveM already answered your question in the other thread,
> > but if you are still unsure about the patch let me know.
>
> I do failed to get the point :-(
>
> As I checked the:
>   https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/netdev/net.git
>
> both v1 and v2 are there with the same description and both code modifica=
tion
> are applied.
>
> We want revert v1 but not in a revert patch style, then do you suggest
> send a normal patch to do the code revert?

It sounds like DaveM wants you to create a normal (not a revert) patch
that removes the v1 changes while leaving the v2 changes intact.  In
the patch description you can mention that v1 was merged as a mistake
and that v2 is the correct fix (provide commit IDs for each in your
commit description using the usual 12-char hash snippet followed by
the subject in parens-and-quotes).

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