linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] Coccinelle: zalloc-simple: Fix patch mode for dma_alloc

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: <20200407160330.5m75sfkhrrx3wgrl@lenovo-laptop>
Date:   Tue, 7 Apr 2020 17:03:30 +0100
From:   Alex Dewar <alex.dewar@....co.uk>
To:     Markus Elfring <Markus.Elfring@....de>
Cc:     cocci@...teme.lip6.fr, kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org,
        Gilles Muller <Gilles.Muller@...6.fr>,
        Julia Lawall <Julia.Lawall@...6.fr>,
        Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@...ionext.com>,
        Michal Marek <michal.lkml@...kovi.net>,
        Nicolas Palix <nicolas.palix@...g.fr>,
        Allison Randal <allison@...utok.net>,
        Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>,
        Enrico Weigelt <lkml@...ux.net>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Kate Stewart <kstewart@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Luis Chamberlain <mcgrof@...nel.org>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Coccinelle: zalloc-simple: Fix patch mode for
 dma_alloc_coherent()

On Sat, Apr 04, 2020 at 09:06:46AM +0200, Markus Elfring wrote:
> > Commit dfd32cad146e ("dma-mapping: remove dma_zalloc_coherent()"), in
> > removing dma_zalloc_coherent() treewide, inadvertently removed the patch
> > rule for dma_alloc_coherent(), leaving Coccinelle unable to auto-generate
> > patches for this case. Fix this.
>
> I suggest to reconsider also the distribution of recipients for your patch
> according to the fields “Cc” and “To”.

Good point.

>
> Will the software development attention grow in a way so that further
> implementation details can be adjusted also for the mentioned SmPL script?

I'm not sure I understand what you mean. Would you mind clarifying?

Best,
Alex

>
> Regards,
> Markus