[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1d470a85-dd92-44d6-9900-db4c581b68c4@web.de>
Date: Fri, 17 May 2024 16:18:06 +0200
From: Markus Elfring <Markus.Elfring@....de>
To: Harshit Mogalapalli <harshit.m.mogalapalli@...cle.com>,
platform-driver-x86@...r.kernel.org, kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org,
Hans de Goede <hdegoede@...hat.com>,
Ilpo Järvinen <ilpo.jarvinen@...ux.intel.com>,
Srinivas Pandruvada <srinivas.pandruvada@...ux.intel.com>,
Zhang Rui <rui.zhang@...el.com>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...aro.org>, Dan Carpenter <error27@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] platform/x86: ISST: fix use-after-free in
tpmi_sst_dev_remove()
> In tpmi_sst_dev_remove(), tpmi_sst is dereferenced after being freed. Fix this by reordering the kfree() post the dereference.
I suggest to take preferred line lengths better into account
also for such a change description.
Thus the second sentence should be put into a subsequent line.
How do you think about the following wording approach?
Move a kfree() call behind an assignment statement in the affected if branch.
Regards,
Markus
Powered by blists - more mailing lists