From: Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu
To: kernel test robot <xiaolong.ye@intel.com>
Cc: Nicholas Krause <xerofoify@gmail.com>,
0day robot <fengguang.wu@intel.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
lkp@01.org
Subject: Re: [lkp] [fs] 45ec18d5c7: BUG: KASAN: user-memory-access on address 00007f90291c7ec0
Date: Mon, 08 Aug 2016 12:29:43 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <17429.1470673783@turing-police.cc.vt.edu> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20160807140242.GA21617@yexl-desktop>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 843 bytes --]
On Sun, 07 Aug 2016 22:02:42 +0800, kernel test robot said:
> FYI, we noticed the following commit:
>
> https://github.com/0day-ci/linux
> Nicholas-Krause/fs-Fix-kmemleak-leak-warning-in-getname_flags-about-working-on-unitialized-memory/20160804-055054
> commit 45ec18d5c713bccb9807782f0dca29b92ba99784 ("fs:Fix kmemleak leak warning in getname_flags about working on unitialized memory")
The real question here is why the 0day system was even bothering to try
compiling and booting a patch from somebody who has a long record of failing
to do so with patches before submission. Actually looking at the patch
in question shows that little or no thought or testing was done (hint:
look at it, and wonder in amazement why there's a dump_stack() call where
it is....)
In other words - how did this patch get into a tree that 0day listens to?
[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 848 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-08-08 16:29 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-08-07 14:02 [lkp] [fs] 45ec18d5c7: BUG: KASAN: user-memory-access on address 00007f90291c7ec0 kernel test robot
2016-08-07 14:02 ` kernel test robot
2016-08-08 16:29 ` Valdis.Kletnieks [this message]
2016-08-09 1:17 ` [lkp] " Ye Xiaolong
2016-08-09 1:17 ` Ye Xiaolong
2016-08-09 1:27 ` [lkp] " Al Viro
2016-08-09 1:27 ` Al Viro
2016-08-09 3:18 ` [lkp] " Ye Xiaolong
2016-08-09 3:18 ` Ye Xiaolong
2016-08-09 2:15 ` [lkp] " Valdis.Kletnieks
2016-08-09 3:20 ` Ye Xiaolong
2016-08-09 3:20 ` Ye Xiaolong
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=17429.1470673783@turing-police.cc.vt.edu \
--to=valdis.kletnieks@vt.edu \
--cc=fengguang.wu@intel.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=lkp@01.org \
--cc=xerofoify@gmail.com \
--cc=xiaolong.ye@intel.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.