[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20091006153331.58287b5c@gondolin>
Date: Tue, 6 Oct 2009 15:33:31 +0200
From: Cornelia Huck <cornelia.huck@...ibm.com>
To: ext-phil.2.carmody@...ia.com
Cc: "gregkh@...e.de" <gregkh@...e.de>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] Kobject: bail early if no new_parent in
kobject_move()
On Tue, 06 Oct 2009 11:52:09 +0300,
Phil Carmody <ext-phil.2.carmody@...ia.com> wrote:
> On Mon, 2009-10-05 at 18:37 +0200, ext Cornelia Huck wrote:
> > On Thu, 1 Oct 2009 17:50:48 +0300,
> > Phil Carmody <ext-phil.2.carmody@...ia.com> wrote:
> >
> > > From: Phil Carmody <ext-phil.2.carmody@...ia.com>
> > >
> > > In the absense of kobj->kset, new_parent would remain NULL.
> > > NULL-dereference shenanighans then ensues in the subsequent
> > > sysfs_move_dir(..., new_parent) call. Bail early instead.
> >
> > But sysfs_move_dir(..., NULL) should work and fall back to the sysfs
> > root...
>
> I guess there are two schools of thought - the strict and the
> accommodating. I was contemplating resending an even stricter patch, but
> there's nothing wrong with adopting sane safe fallbacks instead.
I made all the *_move() functions legal for a NULL destination (see
c744aeae9d173a953b771a7ad5c872f91fa99dec), so I'd like to have it back
that way :)
I've put the patch on my s390 system and ran through sysfs_move();
proper patch posting follows.
--
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists