On 1/27/2022 4:36 PM, Kalle Valo wrote:
> Arend van Spriel <arend.vanspriel@broadcom.com> writes:
> 
>> On 1/27/2022 2:17 PM, Kalle Valo wrote:
>>> Arend van Spriel <arend.vanspriel@broadcom.com> writes:
>>>
>>>> On 1/27/2022 1:08 PM, Kalle Valo wrote:
>>>>> Arend van Spriel <arend.vanspriel@broadcom.com> writes:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 1/19/2022 9:53 AM, Phil Elwell wrote:
>>>>>>> On 19/01/2022 06:01, Kalle Valo wrote:
>>>>>>>> Phil Elwell <phil@raspberrypi.com> writes:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> The call to brcm_alt_fw_path in brcmf_fw_get_firmwares is not protected
>>>>>>>>> by a check to the validity of the fwctx->req->board_type pointer. This
>>>>>>>>> results in a crash in strlcat when, for example, the WLAN chip is found
>>>>>>>>> in a USB dongle.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Prevent the crash by adding the necessary check.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> See: https://github.com/raspberrypi/linux/issues/4833
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Fixes: 5ff013914c62 ("brcmfmac: firmware: Allow per-board firmware
>>>>>>>>> binaries")
>>>>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Phil Elwell <phil@raspberrypi.com>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I think this should go to v5.17.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Is that an Ack? Are you asking me to submit the patch in a different way?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Similar/same patch was submitted by Hector Martin [1].
>>>>
>>>> Fine by me. Hector's subset series (fixes) is ready to be taken as
>>>> well, right?
>>>
>>> I have not looked at Hector's patches yet, my plan is to take them to
>>> wireless-next.
>>
>> Some of them are improvements so wireless-next is where those belong,
>> but a few (patches #1-3, and #6) are actual bug fixes.
> 
> To avoid conflicts I'm keeping the bar high for patches going to
> wireless, so it's mostly regression fixes or otherwise important fixes.

Understood. No problem.

Regards,
Arend