linux-kernel - Re: jsm_tty: Deletion of a null pointer check in two 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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <5e7d7252-16d8-0232-c78a-8e01f89e52d8@users.sourceforge.net>
Date:   Mon, 18 Dec 2017 18:14:30 +0100
From:   SF Markus Elfring <elfring@...rs.sourceforge.net>
To:     "Guilherme G. Piccoli" <gpiccoli@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
        linux-serial@...r.kernel.org
Cc:     Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>, Jiri Slaby <jslaby@...e.com>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: jsm_tty: Deletion of a null pointer check in two functions?

> So, what do you prefer? Send it yourself,

I became concerned that “my patch” would not get picked up because of
Greg's communication settings (for my initial messages when they do not get
resent by other contributors).

> or want me to send it with your sign-off too? (since was your idea).

I would prefer this variant because I assume that the chances for integration
are higher for the discussed small source code adjustment.
I guess that the tag “Suggested-by” would be sufficient in this case.

Regards,
Markus