linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] objtool: Fix memory leak in decode

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:   Fri, 20 Oct 2017 09:24:08 +0200
From:   Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
To:     Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...hat.com>
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Kamalesh Babulal <kamalesh@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] objtool: Fix memory leak in decode_instructions()


* Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...hat.com> wrote:

> On Thu, Oct 19, 2017 at 05:21:06PM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > 
> > * Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...hat.com> wrote:
> > 
> > > Hi Ingo,
> > > 
> > > I'm not sure if you saw the below ACK.  In general, for objtool patches
> > > which don't have you on CC, is it ok if I just add you to CC along with
> > > the ACK?  Or would you prefer I resend the patch to you with my SOB?
> > 
> > Yeah, that would be nice - that way I get your SOB which is better.
> 
> Sounds good.  And for patches which you *are* on CC, do you have a
> preference (ACK or resend with SOB)?

In general resend with SOB would be more robust for me, but as the 
objtool/x86-debuginfo maintainer it's your call really, I can certainly do both.

Thanks,

	Ingo