Message ID | 20201114173358.2058600-1-mkl@pengutronix.de |
---|---|
State | Superseded |
Headers | show |
Series | pull-request: can 2020-11-14 | expand |
On Sat, 14 Nov 2020 18:33:44 +0100 Marc Kleine-Budde wrote: > Anant Thazhemadam contributed two patches for the AF_CAN that prevent potential > access of uninitialized member in can_rcv() and canfd_rcv(). > > The next patch is by Alejandro Concepcion Rodriguez and changes can_restart() > to use the correct function to push a skb into the networking stack from > process context. > > Zhang Qilong's patch fixes a memory leak in the error path of the ti_hecc's > probe function. > > A patch by me fixes mcba_usb_start_xmit() function in the mcba_usb driver, to > first fill the skb and then pass it to can_put_echo_skb(). > > Colin Ian King's patch fixes a potential integer overflow on shift in the > peak_usb driver. > > The next two patches target the flexcan driver, a patch by me adds the missing > "req_bit" to the stop mode property comment (which was broken during net-next > for v5.10). Zhang Qilong's patch fixes the failure handling of > pm_runtime_get_sync(). > > The next seven patches target the m_can driver including the tcan4x5x spi > driver glue code. Enric Balletbo i Serra's patch for the tcan4x5x Kconfig fix > the REGMAP_SPI dependency handling. A patch by me for the tcan4x5x driver's > probe() function adds missing error handling to for devm_regmap_init(), and in > tcan4x5x_can_remove() the order of deregistration is fixed. Wu Bo's patch for > the m_can driver fixes the state change handling in > m_can_handle_state_change(). Two patches by Dan Murphy first introduce > m_can_class_free_dev() and then make use of it to fix the freeing of the can > device. A patch by Faiz Abbas add a missing shutdown of the CAN controller in > the m_can_stop() function. Two invalid fixes tags here, do you want to respin or should I pull?
On Sat, 14 Nov 2020 17:35:01 -0800 Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> Two invalid fixes tags here, do you want to respin or should I pull?
Just realized you probably have these objects in your tree so it'd be
useful if I told you which ones ;)
Commit: be719591ede2 ("can: m_can: Fix freeing of can device from peripherials")
Fixes tag: Fixes: d42f4e1d06d9 ("can: m_can: Create a m_can platform framework")
Has these problem(s):
- Target SHA1 does not exist
Commit: aff1dea235ee ("can: m_can: m_can_class_free_dev(): introduce new function")
Fixes tag: Fixes: d42f4e1d06d9 ("can: m_can: Create a m_can platform framework")
Has these problem(s):
- Target SHA1 does not exist
On 11/15/20 2:39 AM, Jakub Kicinski wrote: > On Sat, 14 Nov 2020 17:35:01 -0800 Jakub Kicinski wrote: >> Two invalid fixes tags here, do you want to respin or should I pull? Let me respin this. It'll have the new date tag of today (15th). > Just realized you probably have these objects in your tree so it'd be > useful if I told you which ones ;) I haven't checked the fixes tags, they were added by the submitter of the patch. How do you test for the fixes? Is that script avaiable somewhere? > Commit: be719591ede2 ("can: m_can: Fix freeing of can device from peripherials") > Fixes tag: Fixes: d42f4e1d06d9 ("can: m_can: Create a m_can platform framework") > Has these problem(s): > - Target SHA1 does not exist > Commit: aff1dea235ee ("can: m_can: m_can_class_free_dev(): introduce new function") > Fixes tag: Fixes: d42f4e1d06d9 ("can: m_can: Create a m_can platform framework") > Has these problem(s): > - Target SHA1 does not exist regards, Marc
On 11/15/20 5:58 PM, Marc Kleine-Budde wrote: > On 11/15/20 2:39 AM, Jakub Kicinski wrote: >> On Sat, 14 Nov 2020 17:35:01 -0800 Jakub Kicinski wrote: >>> Two invalid fixes tags here, do you want to respin or should I pull? > > Let me respin this. It'll have the new date tag of today (15th). It's linux-can-fixes-for-5.10-20201115, for the pull request see: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20201115174131.2089251-1-mkl@pengutronix.de regards, Marc
On Sun, 15 Nov 2020 17:58:27 +0100 Marc Kleine-Budde wrote: > On 11/15/20 2:39 AM, Jakub Kicinski wrote: > > On Sat, 14 Nov 2020 17:35:01 -0800 Jakub Kicinski wrote: > >> Two invalid fixes tags here, do you want to respin or should I pull? > > Let me respin this. It'll have the new date tag of today (15th). > > > Just realized you probably have these objects in your tree so it'd be > > useful if I told you which ones ;) > > I haven't checked the fixes tags, they were added by the submitter of the patch. > How do you test for the fixes? Is that script avaiable somewhere? I stole this script from Stephen Rothwell & Greg: https://github.com/gregkh/gregkh-linux/blob/master/work/verify_fixes.sh https://github.com/kuba-moo/nipa/blob/master/tests/patch/verify_fixes/verify_fixes.sh