linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4 01/12] nvdimm/pmem: Fix leak on dax_add

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: Thu, 8 Feb 2024 14:12:09 -0800
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>
Cc: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
 Dave Chinner <david@...morbit.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Linus
 Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>, Vishal Verma
 <vishal.l.verma@...el.com>, Dave Jiang <dave.jiang@...el.com>, Matthew
 Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>, Russell King <linux@...linux.org.uk>,
 linux-arch@...r.kernel.org, linux-cxl@...r.kernel.org,
 linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
 linux-xfs@...r.kernel.org, dm-devel@...ts.linux.dev,
 nvdimm@...ts.linux.dev, linux-s390@...r.kernel.org, Alasdair Kergon
 <agk@...hat.com>, Mike Snitzer <snitzer@...nel.org>, Mikulas Patocka
 <mpatocka@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 01/12] nvdimm/pmem: Fix leak on dax_add_host()
 failure

On Thu, 8 Feb 2024 17:04:52 -0500 Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com> wrote:

> > The series seems useful but is at v4 without much sign of review
> > activity.  I think I'll take silence as assent and shall slam it all
> > into -next and see who shouts at me.
> > 
> 
> Thanks Andrew for picking it up! Dan just reacted with feedback that
> will help reducing the patch series size by removing intermediate
> commits. I'll implement the requested changes and post a v5 in a few
> days.

Yup.  I'll leave v4 out there for testers to bet on.

> So far there are not behavior changes requested in Dan's feedback.
> 
> Should I keep this patch 01/12 within the series for v5 or should I
> send it separately ?

Doesn't matter much, but perfectionism does say "standalone patch please".