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  PHC 
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.
[<prev] [next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:   Wed, 6 May 2020 08:12:35 +0200
From:   Markus Elfring <>
To:     Qiushi Wu <>,
Cc:     LKML <>,,
        Kangjie Lu <>, Jakub Kicinski <>,
        "David S. Miller" <>
Subject: Re: [v3] nfp: abm: Fix incomplete release of system resources in

> I'm curious if I could still modify these commit message information for the v1 patch,
> which has already been applied and queued up?

The maintainer found the provided information good enough.
Thus he committed the software correction with the subject
“nfp: abm: fix a memory leak bug” on 2020-05-04.

So this change will probably be published “forever” since then.

I got the impression that the corresponding patch review contains helpful information.
I am curious then if it might affect the adjustment of related patches.

>> Will such considerations become relevant for any subsequent
>> software development approaches?
> Sorry, I actually don't familiar with these.

I am informed in the way that you can participate in university research groups.
Thus I assumed that you would like to add recent insights
from computer science areas.
I imagined that the bug report (combined with a patch) was triggered by
an evolving source code analysis approach which will be explained
in another research paper. Is such a view appropriate?


Powered by blists - more mailing lists