[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <aa12c80c-9769-424a-ba2b-8c0f68b1c1e6@web.de>
Date: Sat, 20 Apr 2024 15:15:16 +0200
From: Markus Elfring <Markus.Elfring@....de>
To: Abhishek Pandit-Subedi <abhishekpandit@...omium.org>,
linux-usb@...r.kernel.org, kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org,
Heikki Krogerus <heikki.krogerus@...ux.intel.com>,
Jameson Thies <jthies@...gle.com>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Benson Leung <bleung@...gle.com>,
Bjorn Andersson <andersson@...nel.org>,
Dmitry Baryshkov <dmitry.baryshkov@...aro.org>,
Fabrice Gasnier <fabrice.gasnier@...s.st.com>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
Hans de Goede <hdegoede@...hat.com>,
Neil Armstrong <neil.armstrong@...aro.org>,
Rajaram Regupathy <rajaram.regupathy@...el.com>,
Saranya Gopal <saranya.gopal@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/4] usb: typec: ucsi: Fix null deref in trace
> ucsi_register_altmode checks IS_ERR on returned pointer and treats
> NULL as valid. This results in a null deref when
> trace_ucsi_register_altmode is called.
I find that the change description can be improved further.
Is another imperative wording desirable?
Can it be nicer to use the term “dereference” for the final commit message?
Regards,
Markus
Powered by blists - more mailing lists