linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v1 1/1] tty: Drop duplicate NULL check in TTY port functions

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <Yf1F+R8YZ+Lg7Xw8@smile.fi.intel.com>
Date:   Fri, 4 Feb 2022 17:27:53 +0200
From:   Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>
To:     Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
Cc:     Jiri Slaby <jirislaby@...nel.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 1/1] tty: Drop duplicate NULL check in TTY port
 functions

On Fri, Feb 04, 2022 at 03:42:15PM +0100, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 03, 2022 at 12:40:00PM +0200, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > On Thu, Feb 03, 2022 at 09:36:55AM +0100, Jiri Slaby wrote:
> > > On 02. 02. 22, 17:57, Andy Shevchenko wrote:

...

> > > > Note, INIT_KFIFO() is safe without that check, because it's aware of kfifo PTR
> > > > versus embedded kfifo.
> > > 
> > > Not sure what you mean here ^^^? But it might be one of the morning brain
> > > parser errors.
> > 
> > Or maybe my evening weren't working...
> > 
> > Actually INIT_KFIFO() can be outside of that check from day 1 because it
> > operates on a separate member and does not rely on the FIFO itself to be
> > allocated.
> > 
> > I tried to explain that, while kfifo allocation goes together with buffer,
> > there is no dependency to any of those allocations.
> 
> Can you rewrite the changelog to say this?

Sure!

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko