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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CAJRQjocCfuT4k3fvMvzQ4Yf9RUaybggNGqwYdR9He+XEctcj6g@mail.gmail.com>
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