linux-kernel - Re: Coccinelle: semantic patch for missing of_node

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: <20190520093303.GA9320@atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz>
Date:   Mon, 20 May 2019 11:33:03 +0200
From:   Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>
To:     Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@...6.fr>
Cc:     wen.yang99@....com.cn, Markus.Elfring@....de,
        cocci@...teme.lip6.fr, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Gilles Muller <Gilles.Muller@...6.fr>,
        yamada.masahiro@...ionext.com, michal.lkml@...kovi.net,
        nicolas.palix@...g.fr
Subject: Re: Coccinelle: semantic patch for missing of_node_put

Hi!

> A semantic patch has no access to comments.  The only thing I can see to
> do is to use python to interact with some external tools.  For example,
> you could write some code to collect the comments in a file and the lines
> on which they occur, and then get the comment that most closely precedes
> the start of the function.

How dangerous is missing of_node_put? AFAICT it will only result into
very small, one-time memory leak, right?

Could we make sure these patches are _not_ going to stable? Leaking
few bytes once per boot is not really a serious bug.
									Pavel

-- 
(english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
(cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html