linux-hardening - Re: [PATCH v2][next] wifi: wil6210: wmi: Use __counted_by() in struct wmi_set_link_monitor

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date: Tue, 30 Apr 2024 09:39:30 +0300
From: Kalle Valo <kvalo@...nel.org>
To: Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
Cc: "Gustavo A. R. Silva" <gustavoars@...nel.org>,  Jeff Johnson
 <quic_jjohnson@...cinc.com>,  linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org,
  linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,  linux-hardening@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2][next] wifi: wil6210: wmi: Use __counted_by() in
 struct wmi_set_link_monitor_cmd and avoid -Wfamnae warning

Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org> writes:

>> >> > I was just walking through our patch tracker and noticed that I don't
>> >> > see this patch include in -next yet (as of next-20240429). Is there a
>> >> > flush of the ath-next queue planned soon? Or did I miss some change?
>> >> 
>> >> Yeah, wireless-next was pulled last week so most likely we will create
>> >> ath-next pull request this week.
>> >> 
>> >> BTW we are planning to move ath.git to a new location, rename branches
>> >> etc. I think we'll see if we can also setup it so that it can be pulled
>> >> to linux-next, so that you don't need to ask this every time ;)
>> >> 
>> >> (Just joking of course, there a lot of benefits from having the tree in
>> >> linux-next)
>> >
>> > Ah-ha! Thanks. Yeah, sorry if I keep asking about that. It's different
>> > from other trees, so it doesn't stick in my head. :) I should keep
>> > better notes!
>> 
>> BTW I think all vendor specific wireless driver trees are not pulled to
>> linux-next: iwlwifi, mt76, rtw (Realtek) and ath. So with all of these it will
>> take a while before the commit is in linux-next.
>
> How long is "a while"?

The cadence can be anything from 1-4 times per release (~8 weeks).
Depends on the maintainer, how busy we are etc.

> And if the latency can be reduced for these, it'd be nice since it
> would allow for longer bake-time in -next.

Sure but our time is limited, as always :) There's extra overhead with
linux-next, like the rule that no updates during the merge window, so I
can understand why some maintainers have not included their tree to
linux-next builds.

-- 
https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-wireless/list/

https://wireless.wiki.kernel.org/en/developers/documentation/submittingpatches