linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] kernel/groups.c: consider about NULL for 'group

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]

Message-ID: <5242372C.4010509@asianux.com>
Date:	Wed, 25 Sep 2013 09:06:52 +0800
From:	Chen Gang <gang.chen@...anux.com>
To:	Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
CC:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Michael Kerrisk <mtk.manpages@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] kernel/groups.c: consider about NULL for 'group_info'
 in all related extern functions

On 09/25/2013 08:58 AM, Tejun Heo wrote:
> Hello, Chen.
> 
> On Wed, Sep 25, 2013 at 08:49:31AM +0800, Chen Gang wrote:
>>> Can you please demonstrate such failure?  You can tell kernel to
>>> execute a given binary instead of init with "init=" param.
>>
>> OK, I will/should try, today (although I have to spend my additional
>> time resource on it. :-( ).
> 
> Please note that that's not necessarily "additional" resource that you
> spend.  It's more of something necessary to justify the changes you're
> suggesting.  It's true that not all bug fixes / improvements require
> explicit demonstration but I'm not very convinced about your analysis
> partly because I'm not too familiar with the code path but also
> because the code has been stable with years and you seem pretty new to
> the area.
> 
>> Hmm... in fact, in my opinion, interface (especially content system
>> call) need make itself consistency, although at present, it can not
>> cause issue.
> 
> Sure, it should be consistent but I'm not sure what you're perceiving
> as inconsistent is actually inconsistent.  Anyways, let's please have
> something deomnstratable.  We can think more about the interface
> niggles afterwards.
> 
> Thanks.
> 

OK, I see, the 'root cause' is: "you are not the related maintainer
either", so it is really necessary for me to spend additional time
resource on it :-(.

But all together, thank you for spending your time resource on it, let
us continue :-).


Thanks.
-- 
Chen Gang
--
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/