linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3] powerpc/powernv: add NULL check after kzalloc in opal_add_one

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: <d8334f5d-403f-941f-abcc-2714d297082b@web.de>
Date:   Mon, 6 Apr 2020 12:02:11 +0200
From:   Markus Elfring <Markus.Elfring@....de>
To:     Oliver O'Halloran <oohall@...il.com>,
        Qiujun Huang <hqjagain@...il.com>,
        linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org
Cc:     LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>,
        Michael Ellerman <mpe@...erman.id.au>,
        Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] powerpc/powernv: add NULL check after kzalloc in
 opal_add_one_export

>>>> Here needs a NULL check.
>> quite obvious?

I suggest to consider another fine-tuning for the wording also around
such “obvious” programming items.

>>> I find this change description questionable
>>> (despite of a reasonable patch subject).

I got further development concerns.
https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst?id=a10c9c710f9ecea87b9f4bbb837467893b4bef01#n129

* Were changes mixed for different issues according to the diff code?

* I find it safer here to split specific changes into separate update steps
  for a small patch series.

* Will the addition of the desired null pointer check qualify for
  the specification of the tag “Fixes”?

>>> Will a patch change log be helpful here?
>> I realized I should write some change log, and the change log was meaningless.

Will any more adjustments happen for the discussed update suggestion
after the third patch version?

> The changelog is fine IMO. The point of a changelog is to tell a
> reader doing git archeology why a change happened and this is
> sufficent for that.

We might stumble on a different understanding for the affected “change logs”.
https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst?id=a10c9c710f9ecea87b9f4bbb837467893b4bef01#n751

Would you like to follow the patch evolution a bit easier?

Regards,
Markus