linux-kernel - Re: block: Fix use-after-free in blkdev

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: <453060f2-80af-86a4-7e33-78d4cc87503f@web.de>
Date:   Fri, 5 Jun 2020 15:01:44 +0200
From:   Markus Elfring <Markus.Elfring@....de>
To:     Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>, linux-block@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org
Cc:     Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...cle.com>,
        Jason Yan <yanaijie@...wei.com>, hulkci@...wei.com,
        kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
        Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>, Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>,
        Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>, Ming Lei <ming.lei@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: block: Fix use-after-free in blkdev_get()

>> The details can vary also for my suggestions.
>> Would you point any more disagreements out on concrete items?
>
> That's exactly the problem with many of your comments.
> They're vague to the point of unintelligibility.

Was is so vague about possibilities which I point out for patch reviews
(for example)?
* Spelling corrections
* Additional wording alternatives


>>> But refcount -> reference count is not particularly interesting.
>>
>> Can a wording clarification become helpful also for this issue?
>
> This is a great example.  I have no idea what this sentence means.

Some developers usually prefer to use abbreviations at specific places
while I dare to propose the usage of another well-known term
for commit messages.

Regards,
Markus