Re: [PATCH net-deletions] net: remove ax25 and amateur radio (hamradio) subsystem
f6bvp <[email protected]> Tue, 12 May 2026 16:45:10 +0200
| Newsgroups | gmane.linux.kernel.stable,gmane.linux.network,gmane.linux.hams |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
From: Bernard Pidoux <[email protected]> Toke Høiland-Jørgensen <[email protected]> writes: > Acked-by: Toke Høiland-Jørgensen <[email protected]> Hello Toke, Jakub, all, I understand the decision to move AX.25, NET/ROM, and ROSE out of tree, and I am not opposing it. The maintenance burden caused by AI-generated syzbot reports with no human follow-up is a legitimate reason to act. That said, I would like to raise one specific concern: the ROSE subsystem accumulated a number of real bugs through upstream commits that were merged without hardware testing. I have been running ROSE on actual packet radio equipment and was able to reproduce and fix five of these bugs, confirmed via KASAN and netconsole. The most severe symptom is that the ROSE module cannot be cleanly unloaded once an AX.25 connection has been established, which makes amateur radio applications that rely on ROSE effectively unusable until a reboot. My five patches address: 1. rose: fix dev_put() leak in rose_loopback_timer() Fixes: 0453c6824595 ("net/rose: fix unbound loop in rose_loopback_timer()") 2. rose: hold loopback neighbour reference across timer callback Fixes: d860d1faa6b2 ("net: rose: convert 'use' field to refcount_t") 3. rose: fix race between loopback timer and module removal Fixes: 1da177e4c3f4 ("Linux-2.6.12-rc2") 4. rose: clear neighbour pointer after rose_neigh_put() in state machines Fixes: d860d1faa6b2 ("net: rose: convert 'use' field to refcount_t") 5. rose: guard rose_neigh_put() against NULL in timer expiry Fixes: 5de7665e0a07 ("net: rose: fix timer races against user threads") Each patch carries the appropriate Fixes: tag and a Tested-by from me on real hardware. They are visible on lore.kernel.org. Since ROSE will no longer be maintained in-tree from 7.1 onward, the only remaining users are those running current stable kernels (7.0.y and earlier). Would it be possible to have these five patches queued for the stable trees via Greg's stable process? I am happy to resend them as a formal series tagged [PATCH stable] against the current stable releases if that is preferred. Thank you for your work on the Linux networking subsystem. 73 de Bernard Pidoux, F6BVP <[email protected]>