linux-kernel - Re: [v2] intel_th: core: fix null pointer dereference in intel_th

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: <834iolbu4f.fsf@black.igk.intel.com>
Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2026 13:49:04 +0100
From: Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com>
To: David Arcari <darcari@...hat.com>
Cc: alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
 kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [v2] intel_th: core: fix null pointer dereference in intel_th_irq

David Arcari <darcari@...hat.com> writes:

> On 11/20/25 8:07 AM, Markus Elfring wrote:
>> …>>> the same array.  This can be fixed by disabling interrupts
>>>>> during the call to intel_th_output_enable().
>>>>
>>>> 1. Would another imperative wording become helpful for an improved change description?
>>>>      https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst?h=v6.18-rc6#n94
>>>
>>> I feel like the description explains the problem well.
>> 
>> Perhaps?
>> 
>> 
>>> However, do you have alternate wording you would like to suggest?
>> 
>> Under which circumstances would you get into the mood to convert the wording approach
>> “can be fixed by” into an imperative one?
>
> I see. I will make that change if a v3 is in order. Naturally, I'd like 
> to hear back from Alexander before putting more effort into this.

Sorry for the delay, I found a working intel_th, so I'm looking into it,
I'll get back to you shortly.

Thanks,
--
Alex