linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] mm: page_io: Prefer 'unsigned int' to bare use of 'unsigned'

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]

Date:   Wed, 14 Jun 2023 19:12:58 +0100
From:   Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>
To:     Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc:     hexingwei001@...suo.com, linux-mm@...ck.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm: page_io: Prefer 'unsigned int' to bare use of
 'unsigned'

On Wed, Jun 14, 2023 at 11:09:23AM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Wed, 14 Jun 2023 15:23:44 +0800 hexingwei001@...suo.com wrote:

All the patches from 208suo.com should be discarded.  From conversations
I've seen elsewhere, they aren't compile tested, they're whitespace
damaged and often they're just wrong.

<x> has anyone seen 208suo.com patches?
<x> so far all I've seen are either utterly wrong or won't even compile
<x> and a bunch of different email addresses/names from that domain, but all the patches coming at around the same time? it's very weird
<x> and also all the same kind of patches
<x> "remove unneeded variable" - per coccicheck, which is just not smart enough about the macro constructions
<x> and of course 20 minutes after I ask them to stop, they send another broken patch