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  PHC 
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
 
Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.
[<prev] [next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:   Wed, 6 May 2020 08:12:35 +0200
From:   Markus Elfring <Markus.Elfring@....de>
To:     Qiushi Wu <wu000273@....edu>, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Cc:     LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, oss-drivers@...ronome.com,
        Kangjie Lu <kjlu@....edu>, Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>
Subject: Re: [v3] nfp: abm: Fix incomplete release of system resources in
 nfp_abm_vnic_set_mac()

> I'm curious if I could still modify these commit message information for the v1 patch,
> which has already been applied and queued up?

The maintainer found the provided information good enough.
Thus he committed the software correction with the subject
“nfp: abm: fix a memory leak bug” on 2020-05-04.
https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/next/linux-next.git/commit/drivers/net/ethernet/netronome/nfp/abm/main.c?id=bd4af432cc71b5fbfe4833510359a6ad3ada250d

So this change will probably be published “forever” since then.

I got the impression that the corresponding patch review contains helpful information.
I am curious then if it might affect the adjustment of related patches.


>> Will such considerations become relevant for any subsequent
>> software development approaches?
>
> Sorry, I actually don't familiar with these.

I am informed in the way that you can participate in university research groups.
Thus I assumed that you would like to add recent insights
from computer science areas.
I imagined that the bug report (combined with a patch) was triggered by
an evolving source code analysis approach which will be explained
in another research paper. Is such a view appropriate?
https://github.com/umnsec/cheq/

Regards,
Markus

Powered by blists - more mailing lists