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
| ||
|
Date: Mon, 6 Apr 2020 18:40:25 +0800 From: Qiujun Huang <hqjagain@...il.com> To: Markus Elfring <Markus.Elfring@....de> Cc: "Oliver O'Halloran" <oohall@...il.com>, linuxppc-dev <linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org>, 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 On Mon, Apr 6, 2020 at 6:02 PM Markus Elfring <Markus.Elfring@....de> wrote: > > >>>> 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 Thanks for the reply. I should study the documentation first. BTW, happy new week
Powered by blists - more mailing lists