linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4] vt: fix a missing-check bug in con

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:   Wed, 12 Jun 2019 21:44:49 +0800
From:   Gen Zhang <blackgod016574@...il.com>
To:     Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
Cc:     nico@...xnic.net, kilobyte@...band.pl, textshell@...uujin.de,
        mpatocka@...hat.com, daniel.vetter@...ll.ch,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4] vt: fix a missing-check bug in con_init()

On Wed, Jun 12, 2019 at 03:38:38PM +0200, Greg KH wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 12, 2019 at 09:15:06PM +0800, Gen Zhang wrote:
> > In function con_init(), the pointer variable vc_cons[currcons].d, vc and 
> > vc->vc_screenbuf is allocated by kzalloc(). However, kzalloc() returns 
> > NULL when fails. Therefore, we should check the return value and handle 
> > the error.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Gen Zhang <blackgod016574@...il.com>
> > ---
> 
> What changed from v1, v2, and v3?
Thanks for your timely response. I am not a native English speaker, so
I am not sure I understand this correctly. Does this mean that I should
use "v5", rather than "v4"? 
> 
> That always goes below the --- line.
And I can't see what goes wrong with "---". Could you please make some
explaination?

Thanks
Gen
> 
> v5 please.
> 
> thanks,
> 
> greg k-h