linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] Fix parse

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: <0fd14d20-ae3a-07d9-ee73-fe08ee9af770@infradead.org>
Date:   Mon, 18 Dec 2017 09:57:17 -0800
From:   Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...radead.org>
To:     Michal Suchánek <msuchanek@...e.de>
Cc:     Hari Bathini <hbathini@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
        linuxppc-dev <linuxppc-dev@...abs.org>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Ankit Kumar <ankit@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
        lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Mahesh J Salgaonkar <mahesh@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Fix parse_args cycle limit check.

On 12/18/2017 09:34 AM, Michal Suchánek wrote:
> On Fri, 15 Dec 2017 15:49:09 -0800
> Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...radead.org> wrote:
> 
>> On 12/15/2017 01:41 PM, Michal Suchanek wrote:
>>> Actually args are supposed to be renamed to next so both and args
>>> hold the previous argument so both can be passed to the callback.
>>> This additionla patch  
>>
>>                                                                 additional
>>
>>> should fix up the rename.  
>>
>> Would you try rewriting the first sentence, please? I don't get it.
> 
> Ok, I guess this should be clarified. For the original patch and the
> fixup squashed together this is what the patch is supposed to do:
> 
> This patch adds variable for tracking the parameter which is currently
> being processed. There is "args" variable which tracks the parameter
> which will be processed next so this patch adds "next" variable to
> track that and uses "args" to track the current argument.

OK, thanks.


-- 
~Randy