linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] gfs2: Fix error path kobject memory leak

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:   Mon, 13 May 2019 15:47:22 -0700
From:   Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To:     Andreas Gruenbacher <agruenba@...hat.com>
Cc:     cluster-devel <cluster-devel@...hat.com>,
        Linux List Kernel Mailing <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "Tobin C. Harding" <tobin@...nel.org>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] gfs2: Fix error path kobject memory leak

On Mon, May 13, 2019 at 3:37 PM Andreas Gruenbacher <agruenba@...hat.com> wrote:
>
> Sorry, I should have been more explicit. Would you mind taking this
> patch, please? If it's more convenient or more appropriate, I'll send
> a pull request instead.

Done.

However,I'd like to point out that when I see patches from people who
I normally get a pull request from, I usually ignore them.

Particularly when they are in some thread with discussion, I'll often
just assume that  th epatch is part of the thread, not really meant
for me in particular.

In this case I happened to notice that suddenly my participation
status changed, which is why I asked, but in general I might hav ejust
archived the thread with the assumption that I'll be getting the patch
later as a git pull.

Just so you'll be aware of this in the future, in case I don't react...

               Linus