[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <2025070301-albatross-angriness-00c1@gregkh>
Date: Thu, 3 Jul 2025 12:03:07 +0200
From: Greg KH <greg@...ah.com>
To: "Xu, Lizhi" <Lizhi.Xu@...driver.com>
Cc: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux Next Mailing List <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: 回复: 回复: linux-next:
build failure after merge of the char-misc tree
A: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Top_post
Q: Were do I find info about this thing called top-posting?
A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
A: Top-posting.
Q: What is the most annoying thing in e-mail?
A: No.
Q: Should I include quotations after my reply?
http://daringfireball.net/2007/07/on_top
On Thu, Jul 03, 2025 at 09:44:13AM +0000, Xu, Lizhi wrote:
>
> Perhaps you can focus on "struct vmci_event_ctx", whose members have already clearly defined which are the payloads.
I do not understand this statement at all, sorry.
> On the other hand, the purpose of the patch is to prevent the data in "struct vmci_event_ctx" from being initialized before the datagram is sent, thus preventing the uninitialized data from leaking to user space.
Great, then do this properly, again, you are just "guessing" that there
is not going to be any padding between the structures. Are you sure
there isn't? How? Where is that enforced in your patch?
thanks,
greg k-h
Powered by blists - more mailing lists