linux-kernel - Re: scsi: aic7xxx: Remove null pointer checks before kfree()

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: <cd462354-a14c-ddb2-c728-17a6073a5de0@web.de>
Date:   Thu, 9 Apr 2020 16:27:04 +0200
From:   Markus Elfring <Markus.Elfring@....de>
To:     Alex Dewar <alex.dewar@....co.uk>, linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Hannes Reinecke <hare@...e.com>,
        "James E. J. Bottomley" <jejb@...ux.ibm.com>,
        "Martin K. Petersen" <martin.petersen@...cle.com>,
        Qiujun Huang <hqjagain@...il.com>
Subject: Re: scsi: aic7xxx: Remove null pointer checks before kfree()

> The thing is that this seems like an obvious improvement

Such a view can be promising.


> (albeit not a terribly critical one).

The prioritisation influences change integration considerably.


> It reduces SLoC and removes an unnecessary check.

I hope that such goals will be reconsidered also for this software module.


> AFAICS the patch you mention wasn't rejected on technical grounds,
> but simply wasn't picked up.

The usual factors were involved for free software development.


> If there is a reason why this change isn't warranted
> then I'd like to know why so I can send better patches in future :-)

I hope that also your change interests can increase chances for
software evolution in desired directions.
With which delays will specific improvements be achieved?

Regards,
Markus