linux-kernel - Re: Adjusting SmPL script “ptr

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Sat, 7 Sep 2019 18:20:02 +0200
From:   Markus Elfring <Markus.Elfring@....de>
To:     Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@...6.fr>,
        Coccinelle <cocci@...teme.lip6.fr>,
        kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org
Cc:     LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Allison Randal <allison@...utok.net>,
        Enrico Weigelt <lkml@...ux.net>,
        Gilles Muller <Gilles.Muller@...6.fr>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Kate Stewart <kstewart@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@...ionext.com>,
        Michal Marek <michal.lkml@...kovi.net>,
        Nicolas Palix <nicolas.palix@...g.fr>
Subject: Re: Adjusting SmPL script “ptr_ret.cocci”?

>> How do you think about to reduce subsequent SmPL rules also according to
>> a possible recombination of affected implementation details?
>
> There is not going to be any change with respect to this issue.

I am curious if the software situation will be reconsidered any further
under other circumstances.


> It's fine when replacing one statement by another, but introduces complexity
> when removing something more complex.

Thanks for such information.


> And there's not point to have something that works in only one special case.

Will corresponding software development concerns be eventually discussed
a bit more?

Regards,
Markus