linux-kernel - Re: staging: lustre: Less checks in mgc_process_recover

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:	Mon, 14 Dec 2015 18:43:15 +0100
From:	SF Markus Elfring <elfring@...rs.sourceforge.net>
To:	Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...cle.com>
Cc:	devel@...verdev.osuosl.org,
	Andreas Dilger <andreas.dilger@...el.com>,
	Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
	kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Oleg Drokin <oleg.drokin@...el.com>,
	Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@...6.fr>,
	lustre-devel@...ts.lustre.org
Subject: Re: staging: lustre: Less checks in mgc_process_recover_log() after
 error detection

>> I do not like patch squashing for my update suggestions here.
> 
> I am a maintainer in drivers/staging.

Thanks for this information.


> I am telling you what you need to do if you want us to apply your patch.

I am still waiting for a bit more constructive feedback for this
patch series. How many days should I wait before I should send adjusted
update suggestions for this approach?


> What you do with that information is up to you.

Our software development dialogue seems to trigger special
challenges between us so far.
Are you generally willing to change the exception handling for
the memory allocations in the function "mgc_process_recover_log"
at all?

Regards,
Markus
--
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/