Re: [PATCH v2 0/2] Fix the iio-gts-helpers available times table sorting

From: Matti Vaittinen
Date: Tue May 07 2024 - 02:14:30 EST


On 5/6/24 15:53, Jonathan Cameron wrote:
On Mon, 6 May 2024 08:09:27 +0300
Matti Vaittinen <mazziesaccount@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On 5/5/24 20:50, Jonathan Cameron wrote:
On Tue, 30 Apr 2024 15:44:26 +0300
Matti Vaittinen <mazziesaccount@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Fix the available times table sorting in iio-gts-helpers

This series contains a fix and test for the sorting of the available times in
IIO-gts helpers. Fix was originally developed and posted by Chenyuan Yang.

Revision history:
v1 => v2:
- Fix the sender for patch 1/2 (Sic!)
- Fix Co-Developed-by tag (drop this from Chenyuan who
is the original author)
- Fix the From: tag as instructed in:
https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/process/submitting-patches.html

Am I right in thinking this doesn't matter for existing drivers?

I think this is right. Only couple of in-tree drivers are using these
helpers for now, and all of them sorted the tables already in driver.

As such not high priority for back porting?

The bug is pretty nasty as it causes invalid memory accesses. Hence I'd
like to see this landing in the longterm kernels. It seems to me the GTS
helpers got merged in 6.4, so getting the fix backported to 6.6 might
make sense.

I'll assume that and queue it up for 6.11. If someone shouts I can pull the fix
forwards, but then we have the mess of chasing the testing in later.

I am sorry Jonathan but I'm not quite sure what you mean by "pulling fix
forward", or what is the "mess of chasing the testing in later" :)

Hmm. That was an odd choice of words :) I just meant that I could send
the fix in the first set of fixes after 6.10-rc1 rather than waiting for 6.11.

Oh, right :)

For now I'll leave it queued for 6.11 on the basis there are a lot of ways
a driver writer can cause similar out of bounds accesses and they should
notice it not working during testing. So it 'should' not be a problem to
not rush this in.


I guess this means the 6.10 won't have the fix? I believe this is fine - assuming the 6.10 is not going to be an LTS. Thanks for taking care of this! :)

Yours,
-- Matti


--
Matti Vaittinen
Linux kernel developer at ROHM Semiconductors
Oulu Finland

~~ When things go utterly wrong vim users can always type :help! ~~