 Грег Кроа-Хартман (Greg Kroah-Hartman) представил сегодня Linux 2.6.11.2, продолжение серии -stable патчей для ядра Linux. Напомним, что в эти версии (2.6.x.y) входят только те патчи, которые исправляют ошибки, которые реально были замечены пользователями в новых версиях.
В версию 2.6.11.2 вошел всего лишь один патч, но это патч от команды, занимающейся безопасностью системы. Теперь патч доступен на нормальном для патчей местоположении: http://kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/v2.6/patch-2.6.11.2.gz
Патч сделан относительно версии 2.6.11.1, так что для 2.6.11 необходимо применить оба патча.
Немного статистики и changelog:
Makefile | 2 +-
fs/eventpoll.c | 3 ++-
2 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
Summary of changes from v2.6.11.1 to v2.6.11.2
============================================
Greg Kroah-Hartman:
o Linux 2.6.11.2
Linus Torvalds:
o epoll: return proper error on overflow condition
А так как сам патч очень мал, то вот он:
diff -Nru a/Makefile b/Makefile
--- a/Makefile 2005-03-09 00:13:29 -08:00
+++ b/Makefile 2005-03-09 00:13:29 -08:00
@@ -1,7 +1,7 @@
VERSION = 2
PATCHLEVEL = 6
SUBLEVEL = 11
-EXTRAVERSION = .1
+EXTRAVERSION = .2
NAME=Woozy Numbat
# *DOCUMENTATION*
diff -Nru a/fs/eventpoll.c b/fs/eventpoll.c
--- a/fs/eventpoll.c 2005-03-09 00:13:29 -08:00
+++ b/fs/eventpoll.c 2005-03-09 00:13:29 -08:00
@@ -619,6 +619,7 @@
return error;
}
+#define MAX_EVENTS (INT_MAX / sizeof(struct epoll_event))
/*
* Implement the event wait interface for the eventpoll file. It is the kernel
@@ -635,7 +636,7 @@
current, epfd, events, maxevents, timeout));
/* The maximum number of event must be greater than zero */
- if (maxevents <= 0)
+ if (maxevents <= 0 || maxevents > MAX_EVENTS)
return -EINVAL;
/* Verify that the area passed by the user is writeable */
Обновление:
По следам LKML, документ говорит сам за себя (хотя он еще не окончателен):
Everything you ever wanted to know about Linux 2.6 -stable releases.
Rules on what kind of patches are accepted, and what ones are not, into
the "-stable" tree:
- It must be obviously correct and tested.
- It can not bigger than 100 lines, with context.
- It must fix only one thing.
- It must fix a real bug that bothers people (not a, "This could be a
problem..." type thing.)
- It must fix a problem that causes a build error (but not for things
marked CONFIG_BROKEN), an oops, a hang, data corruption, a real
security issue, or some "oh, that's not good" issue. In short,
something critical.
- No "theoretical race condition" issues, unless an explanation of how
the race can be exploited.
- It can not contain any "trivial" fixes in it (spelling changes,
whitespace cleanups, etc.)
- It must be accepted by the relevant subsystem maintainer.
- It must follow Documentation/SubmittingPatches rules.
Procedure for submitting patches to the -stable tree:
- Send the patch, after verifying that it follows the above rules, to
stable@kernel.org.
- The sender will receive an ack when the patch has been accepted into
the queue, or a nak if the patch is rejected. This response might
take a few days, according to the developer's schedules.
- If accepted, the patch will be added to the -stable queue, for review
by other developers.
- Security patches should not be sent to this alias, but instead to the
documented security@kernel.org.
Review cycle:
- When the -stable maintainers decide for a review cycle, the patches
will be sent to the review committee, and the maintainer of the
affected area of the patch (unless the submitter is the maintainer of
the area) and CC: to the linux-kernel mailing list.
- The review committee has 48 hours in which to ack or nak the patch.
- If the patch is rejected by a member of the committee, or linux-kernel
members object to the patch by bringing up issues that the maintainer
and members did not realize, the patch will be dropped from the
queue.
- At the end of the review cycle, the acked patches will be added to
the latest -stable release, and a new -stable release will happen.
- Security patches will be accepted into the -stable tree directly from
the security kernel team, and not go through the normal review cycle.
Contact the kernel security team for more details on this procedure.
Review committe:
- This will be made up of a number of kernel developers who have
volunteered for this task, and a few that haven't.
|
Микропроцессор "Эверест" (1)
Roman I Khimov смотрит rss.php
