MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20230201220704.1543663-1-luiz.dentz@gmail.com>
 <63dae95a.370a0220.25d9.c141@mx.google.com> <CABBYNZKHRbx-uCBQs1kRnbjLETLZ3+_if_68UBq9VzMfHxBbww@mail.gmail.com>
 <CA+hUFcu_E_ixNUbYGOyVKJJ79DX_H2TPaBZDp2uaokLu3WGaBw@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CA+hUFcu_E_ixNUbYGOyVKJJ79DX_H2TPaBZDp2uaokLu3WGaBw@mail.gmail.com>
From:   Luiz Augusto von Dentz <luiz.dentz@gmail.com>
Date:   Tue, 14 Feb 2023 16:58:00 -0800
Message-ID: <CABBYNZJUYZZAvDXM83Ytc_ZzR8aOi1PwM=qaxV=RdXKc8HNpxA@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Bluetooth: L2CAP: Fix potential user-after-free
To:     Alexander Coffin <alex.coffin@matician.com>
Cc:     linux-bluetooth@vger.kernel.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Precedence: bulk

Hi Alex,

On Tue, Feb 14, 2023 at 4:45 PM Alexander Coffin
<alex.coffin@matician.com> wrote:
>
> Hi Luiz,
>
> Sorry about the very slow response, but I just wanted to make sure
> that it worked well on our robots for a while (the crashes were
> sporadic before) before I confirmed that this patch seemed good. We
> have seen no issues with your proposed patch, and I would be happy to
> sign off on it if that matters (I don't do much kernel contribution so
> I don't really know if my sign off means anything).

It has been applied already, but thanks to confirming it is good to go.

> Regards,
> Alexander Coffin
>
>
> On Wed, Feb 1, 2023 at 3:47 PM Luiz Augusto von Dentz
> <luiz.dentz@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Hi Alex,
> >
> > On Wed, Feb 1, 2023 at 2:36 PM <bluez.test.bot@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > This is automated email and please do not reply to this email!
> > >
> > > Dear submitter,
> > >
> > > Thank you for submitting the patches to the linux bluetooth mailing list.
> > > This is a CI test results with your patch series:
> > > PW Link:https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/bluetooth/list/?series=717902
> > >
> > > ---Test result---
> > >
> > > Test Summary:
> > > CheckPatch                    PASS      1.17 seconds
> > > GitLint                       PASS      0.36 seconds
> > > SubjectPrefix                 PASS      0.13 seconds
> > > BuildKernel                   PASS      37.93 seconds
> > > CheckAllWarning               PASS      41.71 seconds
> > > CheckSparse                   PASS      46.75 seconds
> > > CheckSmatch                   PASS      126.54 seconds
> > > BuildKernel32                 PASS      36.61 seconds
> > > TestRunnerSetup               PASS      525.34 seconds
> > > TestRunner_l2cap-tester       PASS      18.69 seconds
> > > TestRunner_iso-tester         PASS      20.41 seconds
> > > TestRunner_bnep-tester        PASS      6.76 seconds
> > > TestRunner_mgmt-tester        PASS      129.22 seconds
> > > TestRunner_rfcomm-tester      PASS      10.65 seconds
> > > TestRunner_sco-tester         PASS      9.84 seconds
> > > TestRunner_ioctl-tester       PASS      11.64 seconds
> > > TestRunner_mesh-tester        PASS      8.60 seconds
> > > TestRunner_smp-tester         PASS      9.80 seconds
> > > TestRunner_userchan-tester    PASS      7.09 seconds
> > > IncrementalBuild              PASS      34.40 seconds
> >
> > Looks like it is good with our tests in CI, that said I do wonder if
> > you guys could enable it to run tests that may trigger these problems,
> > since they normally are not found by normal tests.
> >
> > >
> > >
> > > ---
> > > Regards,
> > > Linux Bluetooth
> > >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Luiz Augusto von Dentz


-- 
Luiz Augusto von Dentz