Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-185106-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 147.75.80.249 as permitted sender) client-ip=147.75.80.249;
Date: Tue, 21 May 2024 16:39:51 +0200
From: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
To: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>
Cc: cve@kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-cve-announce@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: CVE-2024-35906: drm/amd/display: Send DTBCLK disable message on
 first commit
Message-ID: <2024052136-cubbyhole-ecologist-5b68@gregkh>
References: <2024051954-CVE-2024-35906-1c6f@gregkh>
 <ZkxbObACcnUMZ3LA@tiehlicka>
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <ZkxbObACcnUMZ3LA@tiehlicka>

On Tue, May 21, 2024 at 10:28:41AM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote:
> CVE-2024-35881 to revert f341055b10bd ("drm/amd/display: Send DTBCLK
> disable message on first commit") by 3a6a32b31a11 ("Revert
> "drm/amd/display: Send DTBCLK disable message on first commit"") has
> been filed as well.
> 
> Is this really intentional? Should both be rejected?

I don't think so as we had releases with the original commit in it,
which was buggy so then the second one was needed.  So if you only took
the first fix, you have a problem, and need the second one.  If you take
both, all is good.  If you took neither, also all is good.  So be safe
and take both :)

thanks,

greg k-h