linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 02/33] staging: rtl8192e: Fix PREFER_ETHER_ADDR

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

Date:	Thu, 14 May 2015 22:22:57 +0200
From:	Mateusz Kulikowski <mateusz.kulikowski@...il.com>
To:	Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
CC:	dan.carpenter@...cle.com, devel@...verdev.osuosl.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 02/33] staging: rtl8192e: Fix PREFER_ETHER_ADDR_COPY
 warnings

On 12.05.2015 23:19, Greg KH wrote:
> On Tue, May 12, 2015 at 09:52:01PM +0200, Mateusz Kulikowski wrote:
>> On 10.05.2015 15:19, Greg KH wrote:
>>> On Sat, May 09, 2015 at 11:18:50PM +0200, Mateusz Kulikowski wrote:
>>>> Replace memcpy() with ether_addr_copy() where possible to make
>>>> checkpatch.pl happy.
>>>
>>> I need proof that this is ok to do, please provide that in the changelog
>>> entry.
>>
>> What kind of proof do you expect?
> 
> Something, you can't just have this single line here and assume that I
> "know" you actually checked this...
> 

Of course - I understand that (now).

What I meant by this question was - Are the steps I took to verify patch
enough for you (so I'll add information about them to v4 changelog) or do you require 
more checks from my side (for example using static code analyzer).

I assume it's enough and just put it into changelog.


Regards,
Mateusz
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/