[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <2236FBA76BA1254E88B949DDB74E612B41C4D921@IRSMSX102.ger.corp.intel.com>
Date: Mon, 20 Feb 2017 12:20:04 +0000
From: "Reshetova, Elena" <elena.reshetova@...el.com>
To: Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
CC: "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-edac@...r.kernel.org" <linux-edac@...r.kernel.org>,
"x86@...nel.org" <x86@...nel.org>,
"sparclinux@...r.kernel.org" <sparclinux@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-s390@...r.kernel.org" <linux-s390@...r.kernel.org>,
"kvm@...r.kernel.org" <kvm@...r.kernel.org>,
"peterz@...radead.org" <peterz@...radead.org>,
"gregkh@...uxfoundation.org" <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
"davem@...emloft.net" <davem@...emloft.net>,
"tglx@...utronix.de" <tglx@...utronix.de>,
"mingo@...hat.com" <mingo@...hat.com>,
"Luck, Tony" <tony.luck@...el.com>,
"hpa@...or.com" <hpa@...or.com>,
Hans Liljestrand <ishkamiel@...il.com>,
Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
David Windsor <dwindsor@...il.com>
Subject: RE: [PATCH 2/4] x86: convert threshold_bank.cpus from atomic_t to
refcount_t
> On Mon, Feb 20, 2017 at 01:06:19PM +0200, Elena Reshetova wrote:
> > refcount_t type and corresponding API should be
> > used instead of atomic_t when the variable is used as
> > a reference counter. This allows to avoid accidental
> > refcounter overflows that might lead to use-after-free
> > situations.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Elena Reshetova <elena.reshetova@...el.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Hans Liljestrand <ishkamiel@...il.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
> > Signed-off-by: David Windsor <dwindsor@...il.com>
>
> That SOB chain tells me that you wrote the patch and Hans, Kees and
> David handled it in some way and the last one - David - is sending it to
> me. It doesn't look like that though.
>
> So what are you trying to express with it?
Whole refcount conversion was a long piece of work and the above people contributed to this code either as
writes or reviewers or both. I am primary writer of the code and I am handing patches in our tree and sending them out,
so how exactly the above should look like?
Please note that we have about 300 patches and if I have to modify each sign-off to
reflect who contributed to each commit in what particular way, I will go insane.
Best Regards,
Elena.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists