linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] kasan: update function name in comments

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]

Date:   Wed, 23 Feb 2022 14:30:48 -0800
From:   Peter Collingbourne <pcc@...gle.com>
To:     Marco Elver <elver@...gle.com>
Cc:     Miaohe Lin <linmiaohe@...wei.com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Linux Memory Management List <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
        Andrey Konovalov <andreyknvl@...il.com>,
        kasan-dev <kasan-dev@...glegroups.com>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] kasan: update function name in comments

 On Mon, Feb 21, 2022 at 3:15 AM Marco Elver <elver@...gle.com> wrote:
>
> On Sat, 19 Feb 2022 at 03:00, Miaohe Lin <linmiaohe@...wei.com> wrote:
> >
> > On 2022/2/19 9:24, Peter Collingbourne wrote:
> > > The function kasan_global_oob was renamed to kasan_global_oob_right,
> > > but the comments referring to it were not updated. Do so.
> > >
> > > Link: https://linux-review.googlesource.com/id/I20faa90126937bbee77d9d44709556c3dd4b40be
> > > Signed-off-by: Peter Collingbourne <pcc@...gle.com>
> > > Fixes: e5f4728767d2 ("kasan: test: add globals left-out-of-bounds test")
> >
> > This Fixes tag is unneeded.
> >
> > Except the above nit, this patch looks good to me. Thanks.
> >
> > Reviewed-by: Miaohe Lin <linmiaohe@...wei.com>
>
> Reviewed-by: Marco Elver <elver@...gle.com>
>
> And yes, the Fixes tag should be removed to not have stable teams do
> unnecessary work.

I thought that Cc: stable@...r.kernel.org controlled whether the patch
is to be taken to the stable kernel and Fixes: was more of an
informational tag. At least that's what this seems to say:
https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/process/submitting-patches.html#reviewer-s-statement-of-oversight

> +Cc'ing missing mailing lists (use get_maintainers.pl - in particular,
> LKML is missing, which should always be Cc'd for archival purposes so
> that things like b4 can work properly).

get_maintainers.pl tends to list a lot of reviewers so I try to filter
it to only the most important recipients or only use it for
"important" patches (like the uaccess logging patch). It's also a bit
broken in my workflow --
https://lore.kernel.org/all/20210913233435.24585-1-pcc@google.com/
fixes one of the problems but there are others.

Doesn't b4 scan all the mailing lists? So I'd have imagined it
wouldn't matter which one you send it to.

Peter