linux-kernel - Re: [v4] coccinelle: semantic patch for missing put

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, 15 Feb 2019 08:50:27 +0100
From:   Markus Elfring <Markus.Elfring@....de>
To:     Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@...6.fr>
Cc:     Wen Yang <wen.yang99@....com.cn>,
        Gilles Muller <Gilles.Muller@...6.fr>,
        Nicolas Palix <nicolas.palix@...g.fr>,
        Michal Marek <michal.lkml@...kovi.net>,
        Yi Wang <wang.yi59@....com.cn>,
        Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@...ionext.com>,
        Wen Yang <yellowriver2010@...mail.com>,
        Cheng Shengyu <cheng.shengyu@....com.cn>,
        cocci@...teme.lip6.fr, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [v4] coccinelle: semantic patch for missing put_device()

>> So I plan to modify the following to capture both cases:
>> -local idexpression id;
>> +expression id;
>
> I'm not sure that this is a good idea.

Why have you got doubts here?


> There is likely no need for a put in the latter case.

I have got understanding difficulties for such information.
What did you try to express with this sentence finally?

Regards,
Markus