linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 03/33] staging: rtl8192e: Mark unaligned memcpy()

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: <55525D1D.5020104@gmail.com>
Date:	Tue, 12 May 2015 22:05:49 +0200
From:	Mateusz Kulikowski <mateusz.kulikowski@...il.com>
To:	Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
CC:	devel@...verdev.osuosl.org, dan.carpenter@...cle.com,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 03/33] staging: rtl8192e: Mark unaligned memcpy()

On 10.05.2015 15:20, Greg KH wrote:
> On Sat, May 09, 2015 at 11:18:51PM +0200, Mateusz Kulikowski wrote:
>> Comment unaligned memcpy() that trigger PREFER_ETHER_ADDR_COPY
>> checkpatch.pl warning.
>> It will prevent accidential "Fix" to ether_addr_copy().
> 
> What do you mean by this?  Why will the comment remove the issue?
> 

It will not, It will prevent people from sending checkpatch 'fixes' 
until I (or someone else) will submit ultimate fix - that is  
ether_addr_copy_unaligned().

I didn't included it into this series, as this requires cross-tree 
synchronization (net + staging) and I prefer to do it later in a 
smaller changeset (2 patches - one for net, one for staging).

If you think it's unnecessary, I'll throw it away in v4.

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/