linux-kernel - Re: [2/2] virtiofs: Improve error handling in virtio_fs_get

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: <ZZPisBFGvF/qp2eB@casper.infradead.org>
Date: Tue, 2 Jan 2024 10:17:20 +0000
From: Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>
To: Markus Elfring <Markus.Elfring@....de>
Cc: virtualization@...ts.linux.dev, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
	kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org, Miklos Szeredi <miklos@...redi.hu>,
	Stefan Hajnoczi <stefanha@...hat.com>,
	Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@...hat.com>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [2/2] virtiofs: Improve error handling in virtio_fs_get_tree()

On Tue, Jan 02, 2024 at 10:35:17AM +0100, Markus Elfring wrote:
> >>> So what?  kfree(NULL) is perfectly acceptable.
> >>
> >> I suggest to reconsider the usefulness of such a special function call.
> >
> > Can you be more explicit in your suggestion?
> 
> I hope that the change acceptance can grow for the presented transformation.
> Are you looking for an improved patch description?

Do you consider more clarity in your argumentation?