linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/1] platform: x86: Deletion of checks before backlight_device

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:	Sat, 27 Jun 2015 09:07:52 +0200 (CEST)
From:	Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@...6.fr>
To:	Darren Hart <dvhart@...radead.org>
cc:	Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@...6.fr>,
	SF Markus Elfring <elfring@...rs.sourceforge.net>,
	Anisse Astier <anisse@...ier.eu>,
	Corentin Chary <corentin.chary@...il.com>,
	Ike Panhc <ike.pan@...onical.com>,
	Jonathan Woithe <jwoithe@...t42.net>,
	Mattia Dongili <malattia@...ux.it>,
	platform-driver-x86@...r.kernel.org,
	acpi4asus-user@...ts.sourceforge.net,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] platform: x86: Deletion of checks before
 backlight_device_unregister()



On Fri, 26 Jun 2015, Darren Hart wrote:

> On Thu, Nov 27, 2014 at 07:13:10PM +0100, Julia Lawall wrote:
> > 
> > 
> > On Mon, 24 Nov 2014, SF Markus Elfring wrote:
> > 
> > > >> This issue was detected by using the Coccinelle software.
> > > >
> > > > What script was used ?
> > >
> > > A semantic patch approach which I published on the mailing lists in March
> > > is in action on my software development system for a while.
> > >
> > >
> > > > Is it in scripts/coccinelle ?
> > >
> > > Not yet.
> > >
> > > I hope that the involved update suggestions got sufficient positive feedback
> > > to integrate five scripts there.
> > 
> > The current scripts are very complicated, involving the interaction
> > between multiple scripts and a database, and I think they are not very
> > suitable for make coccicheck.  Also, the idea of removing the null checks
> > is not appropriate in all contexts.  Perhaps it could be possible to add
> > a script to the Linux kernel that handles a number of common cases for
> > which removing the null test is widely considered to be desirable.
> > 
> > julia
> > 
> 
> Julia, do you have any particular objection to this specific patch? I didn't see
> a reason to prevent it going in.

Sorry if I was unclear.  If there is no problem with the current patch, I 
have no objection to it.  I don't think that the semantic patch that 
caused this patch to be generated is suitable for inclusion in the Linux 
kernel.

julia
--
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/