linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/2] Input-at32psif: Fine-tuning for OOM handling in psif

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, 02 Jul 2016 13:45:33 -0700
From:	Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>
To:	SF Markus Elfring <elfring@...rs.sourceforge.net>,
	Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@...il.com>,
	linux-input@...r.kernel.org
Cc:	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org,
	Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@...6.fr>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] Input-at32psif: Fine-tuning for OOM handling in
 psif_probe()

On Sat, 2016-07-02 at 21:00 +0200, SF Markus Elfring wrote:
> From: Markus Elfring <elfring@...rs.sourceforge.net>
> Date: Sat, 2 Jul 2016 20:50:09 +0200
> 
> A few update suggestions were taken into account
> from static source code analysis.
> 
> Markus Elfring (2):
>   Return directly after a failed kzalloc()
>   Remove two OOM messages
> 
>  drivers/input/serio/at32psif.c | 10 +++-------
>  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)

What possible rationale is there for including this "references" header?
566ABCD9.1060404@...rs.sourceforge.net

This message id is for your message:
	"Source code review around jump label usage"
sent December 11, 2015!

Please stop adding unnecessary and useless email headers.