linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/5] block-cciss: Fine-tuning for two function implementations

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]

Message-ID: <b85210ef-48a6-401a-06bc-7a279e1078f1@users.sourceforge.net>
Date:   Sun, 6 Aug 2017 17:00:04 +0200
From:   SF Markus Elfring <elfring@...rs.sourceforge.net>
To:     esc.storagedev@...rosemi.com, iss_storagedev@...com,
        linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org, Don Brace <don.brace@...rosemi.com>
Cc:     LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/5] block-cciss: Fine-tuning for two function
 implementations

> Date: Thu, 18 Aug 2016 11:40:04 +0200
> 
> Some update suggestions were taken into account
> from static source code analysis.
> 
> Markus Elfring (5):
>   Use memdup_user()
>   Less function calls after error detection
>   Delete unnecessary initialisations
>   Move an assignment for the variable "sg_used"
>   Replace three kzalloc() calls by kcalloc()
> 
>  drivers/block/cciss.c | 66 ++++++++++++++++++++++++---------------------------
>  1 file changed, 31 insertions(+), 35 deletions(-)

How will the clarification be continued for the shown change possibilities?

Regards,
Markus