Skip to contentSkip to conversation

Requesting CVES to be merged into version 5.15.y

DISCUSSION gregkh 1 participant 2 messages Oct 10 – Oct 12 2 messages not in the archive Stable branch

lore
Share & tools
lore

A message that is not in the archive (sent off-list or not yet received): [email protected]

gregkh

author maintainer
#1 lore raw
Quoted 11 lines · On Sat, Oct 10, 2026 at 03:21:20PM +0800, [email protected] wrote:

Hi stable team,

While reviewing the CVE database against the 5.15.y series we run in production (currently 5.15.222), we found 27 security fixes that are already merged upstream / in newer stable series but are still missing from 5.15.y. Per Documentation/process/stable-kernel-rules.rst (Option 2), We would like to request that these commits be cherry-picked into 5.15.y.

What is the plan for merging these CVEs into 5.15.y? When are they expected to be merged into 5.15.y?

Please feel free to submit these as tested patches that you know work to these trees.

Quoted 10 lines

Summary: 1 CRITICAL (CVSS 9.3), 21 HIGH, 5 unscored (kernel CVE team does not assign CVSS to all records). All commits below exist in mainline; none of them (nor an equivalent) is present in v5.15.y.

Details, one entry per CVE (severity, CVE link, fix commit):

* CVE-2022-49218 (CVSS 7.1 HIGH, CVE-2022-49218) commit a2151490cc6c57b368d7974ffd447a8b36ade639 upstream "drm/dp: Fix OOB read when handling Post Cursor2 register" already fixed in: 5.17.2, 5.18

Here's an example of why this is not in the 5.15.y tree, it does not apply at all. How did you come up with this very small list of CVEs when there are thousands of "missing" fixes in these older trees?

Have you tested this commit to verify it does work properly in the 5.15.y tree?

Again, if you wish to see these all applied, please submit the patches that you have backported.

thanks,

greg k-h

A message that is not in the archive (sent off-list or not yet received): [email protected]

author maintainer
#3 lore raw
Quoted 8 lines · On Mon, Oct 12, 2026 at 10:49:26AM +0800, [email protected] wrote:

Hi stable team,

Quoted 6 lines

Here's an example of why this is not in the 5.15.y tree, it does not apply at all. How did you come up with this very small list of CVEs when there are thousands of "missing" fixes in these older trees?

Have you tested this commit to verify it does work properly in the 5.15.y tree?

Quoted 7 lines
Quoted 2 lines

Again, if you wish to see these all applied, please submit the patches that you have backported.

These CVEs were identified by our customers using third-party scanning tools, and I have verified using strak that the patches for these CVEs are indeed
missing from the latest 5.15.y release.
I actually checked the code, and those CVEs aren't there either.

I agree, these commits are not in the tree, and they are not in the tree as no one has taken the time and effort to do the work to apply them there. If you have customers that need these commits/CVEs fixed, great, please submit working patches that you have tested to resolve these issues and we will gladly apply them.

Quoted 10 lines

For example: [DEBUG strak] Checking CVE-2025-39797

                      5.15.222 is vulnerable to CVE-2025-39797

I have not tested this specific commit on the 5.15.y tree.
I would like to know the reason why these CVEs were not merged into 5.15.y. Does version 5.15.y not need these CVEs?

I have a few questions I would appreciate your help answering:
1. Can you merge the patches for these critical/high-severity CVEs into the 5.15.y tree?

If someone sends them to us, yes we will.

Quoted 1 line

2. If they can be merged, what is the plan? How long would the process take?

Depends on our release cycle / workload, see how long other submitted patches take to get merged. All of our work is in public, it shouldn't be hard to track this.

Quoted 1 line

3. If you decide not to merge them, what is the reason?

We will tell you if you submit them for review if there are any problems with them.

thanks,

greg k-h