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: <90be74caf7b94c5ea08553fc9880a424@realtek.com>
Date: Thu, 13 Feb 2025 00:37:21 +0000
From: Ping-Ke Shih <pkshih@...ltek.com>
To: Jeff Johnson <jeff.johnson@....qualcomm.com>,
        Ethan Carter Edwards
	<ethan@...ancedwards.com>
CC: Kalle Valo <kvalo@...nel.org>,
        Karthikeyan Periyasamy
	<quic_periyasa@...cinc.com>,
        Jeff Johnson <jjohnson@...nel.org>,
        "Harshitha
 Prem" <quic_hprem@...cinc.com>,
        Kalle Valo <quic_kvalo@...cinc.com>,
        "linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org" <linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org>,
        "ath12k@...ts.infradead.org" <ath12k@...ts.infradead.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-hardening@...r.kernel.org" <linux-hardening@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH] wifi: ath12k: Fix uninitialized variable and remove goto

Jeff Johnson <jeff.johnson@....qualcomm.com> wrote:
> On 2/10/2025 8:09 PM, Ping-Ke Shih wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> Addresses-Coverity-ID: 1642337 ("Uninitialized scalar variable")
> >>>
> >>> Is that an official kernel tag? IMO the proper tag would be
> >> So, it isn't "official" as far as I can tell, but it is widely used in
> >> other commits, especially by Gustavo Silva.
> >>
> >> Also:
> >>
> https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/next/linux-next.git/commit/?id=778e2478d19574508861bcb
> >> 1806d6e34d095587c
> >>
> >> Coverity-IDs: is another option I have found. I have seen Closes: a few
> >> times as well. I'm not really sure what the best option is, honestly.
> >
> > In my patch, I used and treated Addresses-Coverity-ID as a unofficial tag,
> > so additional empty line is added.
> >
> > Days ago I have received Coverity issues sent to mailing list, so I used
> > Closes tag at that time. But recently I have not seen that kind of mails.
> > Instead, I visit Coverity web site to check issues and use
> > Addresses-Coverity-ID tag, since Coverity link is not visible to everyone.
> > That is just my thought.
> 
> The problem I have is that I get Coverity fixes both from the linux and the
> linux-next projects:
> 
> https://scan.coverity.com/projects/linux?tab=overview
> https://scan.coverity.com/projects/linux-next-weekly-scan?tab=overview
> 
> The Coverity IDs from these projects are allocated independently, so a
> Coverity ID does not uniquely identify an issue.
> 
> The URL uniquely identifies an issue, and also utilizes an official tag.
> 
> That is my thought.

Yes, I have the same problem as yours. For me, I only annotate Coverity
IDs from linux project, and the linux-next project is as a reference
to check if issues are still existing in -next tree.


Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ