linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH net] net: bcmasp: fix memory leak when bringing down if

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: <20240417161933.GA2320920@kernel.org>
Date: Wed, 17 Apr 2024 17:19:33 +0100
From: Simon Horman <horms@...nel.org>
To: Markus Elfring <Markus.Elfring@....de>
Cc: Justin Chen <justin.chen@...adcom.com>,
	bcm-kernel-feedback-list@...adcom.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
	Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
	Florian Fainelli <florian.fainelli@...adcom.com>,
	Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net] net: bcmasp: fix memory leak when bringing down if

On Mon, Apr 15, 2024 at 09:46:44PM +0200, Markus Elfring wrote:
> >>> When bringing down the TX rings we flush the rings but forget to
> >>> reclaimed the flushed packets. This lead to a memory leak since we
> >>> do not free the dma mapped buffers. …
> >>
> >> I find this change description improvable.
> >>
> >> * How do you think about to avoid typos?
> >>
> >> * Would another imperative wording be more desirable?
> >
> > The change description makes sense to me. Can you be a bit more specific as to what isn't clear here?
> 
> Spelling suggestions:
> + … forget to reclaim …
> + … This leads to …

Markus, let's cut to the chase.

What portion of your responses of this thread were produced
by an LLM or similar technology?

The suggestions in your second email are correct.
But, ironically, your first response appears to be grammatically incorrect.

Specifically:

* What does "improvable" mean in this context?
* "How do you think about to avoid typos?"
  is, in my opinion, grammatically incorrect.
  And, FWIW, I see no typos.
* "Would another imperative wording be more desirable?"
  is, in my opinion, also grammatically incorrect.

And yet your comment is ostensibly about grammar.
I'm sorry, but this strikes me as absurd.