Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 28 Jun 2022 09:32:59 -0400 | From | Sasha Levin <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 5.18 097/181] Revert "net/tls: fix tls_sk_proto_close executed repeatedly" |
| |
On Mon, Jun 27, 2022 at 08:57:28AM -0700, Jakub Kicinski wrote: >On Mon, 27 Jun 2022 17:50:31 +0200 Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: >> On Mon, Jun 27, 2022 at 08:33:13AM -0700, Jakub Kicinski wrote: >> > On Mon, 27 Jun 2022 13:21:10 +0200 Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: >> > > From: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org> >> > > >> > > [ Upstream commit 1b205d948fbb06a7613d87dcea0ff5fd8a08ed91 ] >> > > >> > > This reverts commit 69135c572d1f84261a6de2a1268513a7e71753e2. >> > > >> > > This commit was just papering over the issue, ULP should not >> > > get ->update() called with its own sk_prot. Each ULP would >> > > need to add this check. >> > > >> > > Fixes: 69135c572d1f ("net/tls: fix tls_sk_proto_close executed repeatedly") >> > > Signed-off-by: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org> >> > >> > Mm? How did 69135c572d1f get into stableh? >> > I reverted it before it hit Linus's tree. >> > Don't see the notification about it either. >> >> It is commit 075/181 in this series as you can see here: >> https://lore.kernel.org/r/20220627111946.738369250@linuxfoundation.org > >Argh, I forgot I'm not gonna get CCed if my tags aren't on the >commit in question, sorry for the confusion. > >So I expected patches 075 and 097 would just get dropped since >they are in the same series and are canceling each other out. >But I guess people may edit reverts so you prefer not to >automatically do that?
It's also the case that it's useful for historical purposes to keep track of why a certain commit made it in or not.
-- Thanks, Sasha
| |