linux-kernel - Re: iio: Adjust checks for null pointers in six functions

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:   Sun, 25 Sep 2016 19:45:40 +0200
From:   SF Markus Elfring <elfring@...rs.sourceforge.net>
To:     Jonathan Cameron <jic23@...nel.org>
Cc:     linux-iio@...r.kernel.org, Hartmut Knaack <knaack.h@....de>,
        Lars-Peter Clausen <lars@...afoo.de>,
        Peter Meerwald-Stadler <pmeerw@...erw.net>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org,
        Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@...6.fr>
Subject: Re: iio: Adjust checks for null pointers in six functions

> Also, I'm afraid I don't care enough to put the time in for this one.

It's a pity.

>> Does the tool "Git" let you also apply this update step before
>> the other suggestions?
> It rarely copes with this sort of reordering as it doesn't have
> the semantic knowledge of what matters in the other patches.

I assume that the involved software developers got a specific impression
about the discussed patch series for this software module so that a few
relevant dependencies became clearer eventually.

I proposed some update steps where I chose a specific patch granularity
once more. So I imagine that a bit of variation in the patch order
could be supported already.

Will it be possible to apply also this one a bit later just because
the patch hunk contexts might be still valid in the (near) future?

Regards,
Markus