linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] mtd: cfi_util: mark expected switch fall-throughs

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: <3141647.IxSqQhjO87@blindfold>
Date:   Wed, 20 Mar 2019 22:05:05 +0100
From:   Richard Weinberger <richard@....at>
To:     "Gustavo A. R. Silva" <gustavo@...eddedor.com>
Cc:     David Woodhouse <dwmw2@...radead.org>,
        Brian Norris <computersforpeace@...il.com>,
        Boris Brezillon <bbrezillon@...nel.org>,
        Marek Vasut <marek.vasut@...il.com>,
        linux-mtd@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mtd: cfi_util: mark expected switch fall-throughs

Hi!

Am Mittwoch, 20. März 2019, 21:20:51 CET schrieb Gustavo A. R. Silva:
> Hi all,
> 
> Friendly ping:
> 
> Who can take this?

Hmmm, for MTD I think we can schedule these patches for the next merge window.
But I'm not sure whether these comments are a good solution.
I much more prefer the compiler attribute solution.
Also a tree-wide (sane) coccinelle script would be better IMHO,
and not zillions of individual patches via different trees.

Thanks,
//richard