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] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <256da54b-519f-461d-9586-10b26ef7568e@embeddedor.com>
Date: Tue, 23 Dec 2025 14:54:36 +0900
From: "Gustavo A. R. Silva" <gustavo@...eddedor.com>
To: Zhu Yanjun <yanjun.zhu@...ux.dev>, zyjzyj2000@...il.com, jgg@...pe.ca,
 leon@...nel.org, linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc: "Gustavo A. R. Silva" <gustavoars@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/1] RDMA/rxe: Avoid -Wflex-array-member-not-at-end
 warnings



On 12/23/25 14:44, Zhu Yanjun wrote:
> 
> 在 2025/12/22 21:34, Gustavo A. R. Silva 写道:
>>
>>>>>>> V2->V3: Replace struct ib_sge with struct rxe_sge
>>>>>>
>>>>>> What are you doing?
>>>>>
>>>>> Because struct rxe_sge differs from struct ib_sge, I aligned it to use the same structure.
>>>>
>>>> Listen, this is not how things are done upstream. Read what I previously commented:
>>>>
>>>>>> You're making a mess of this whole thing. Please, don't make changes
>>>>>> to my patches on your own.
>>>>
>>>> and please, learn how to properly submit patch series.
>>>>
>>>> Lastly, do the changes that you want/need to implement in your code, and don't
>>>> submit my patch as part of those changes again.
>>>
>>> You can correct this patch by yourself.
>>
>> https://lore.kernel.org/linux-hardening/ad8987ae-b7fe-47af-a1d2-5055749011c0@embeddedor.com/
> 
> You need to do some changes in your commit.

This is what you haven't understood yet. If the original code is wrong (e.g. is
currently using struct ib_sge instead of struct rxe_sge or the other way around),
then _that_ code should be fixed _first_, regardless of any other patch that might
be applied on top of it.

-Gustavo


Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ