linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3] eeprom: at24: fix memory corruption race condition

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]

Message-ID: <2024042055-bucked-dosage-2a8d@gregkh>
Date: Sat, 20 Apr 2024 12:04:06 +0200
From: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To: Markus Elfring <Markus.Elfring@....de>
Cc: Daniel Okazaki <dtokazaki@...gle.com>, kernel-team@...roid.com,
	linux-i2c@...r.kernel.org, kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org,
	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>, Bartosz Golaszewski <brgl@...ev.pl>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] eeprom: at24: fix memory corruption race condition

On Sat, Apr 20, 2024 at 11:11:05AM +0200, Markus Elfring wrote:
> > If the eeprom is not accessible, an nvmem device will be registered, the
> > read will fail, and the device will be torn down.
> …
> 
> Can it be nicer to present the introduction for failure conditions as an enumeration?
> 
> 
> > Move the failure point before registering the nvmem device.
> …
> 
> I would interpret the diff data more in the way that a devm_nvmem_register() call
> should be performed a bit later in the implementation of the function “at24_probe”.
> How do you think about to mention the affected function also in the summary phrase?
> 

Hi,

This is the semi-friendly patch-bot of Greg Kroah-Hartman.

Markus, you seem to have sent a nonsensical or otherwise pointless
review comment to a patch submission on a Linux kernel developer mailing
list.  I strongly suggest that you not do this anymore.  Please do not
bother developers who are actively working to produce patches and
features with comments that, in the end, are a waste of time.

Patch submitter, please ignore Markus's suggestion; you do not need to
follow it at all.  The person/bot/AI that sent it is being ignored by
almost all Linux kernel maintainers for having a persistent pattern of
behavior of producing distracting and pointless commentary, and
inability to adapt to feedback.  Please feel free to also ignore emails
from them.

thanks,

greg k-h's patch email bot