* [PATCH] iio: imu: st_lsm6dsx: Fix reading array out of bounds
@ 2020-04-09 8:58 Alexandre Bard
2020-04-09 9:17 ` Andy Shevchenko
` (2 more replies)
0 siblings, 3 replies; 8+ messages in thread
From: Alexandre Bard @ 2020-04-09 8:58 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: lorenzo.bianconi83; +Cc: linux-iio, Alexandre Bard
Former code was iterating through all possible IDs whereas only a few
per settings array are really available. Leading to several out of
bounds readings.
Line is now longer than 80 characters. But since it is a classic for
loop I think it is better to keep it like this than splitting it.
Signed-off-by: Alexandre Bard <alexandre.bard@netmodule.com>
---
drivers/iio/imu/st_lsm6dsx/st_lsm6dsx_core.c | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/drivers/iio/imu/st_lsm6dsx/st_lsm6dsx_core.c b/drivers/iio/imu/st_lsm6dsx/st_lsm6dsx_core.c
index 84d219ae6aee..be8882ff30eb 100644
--- a/drivers/iio/imu/st_lsm6dsx/st_lsm6dsx_core.c
+++ b/drivers/iio/imu/st_lsm6dsx/st_lsm6dsx_core.c
@@ -1350,7 +1350,7 @@ static int st_lsm6dsx_check_whoami(struct st_lsm6dsx_hw *hw, int id,
int err, i, j, data;
for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(st_lsm6dsx_sensor_settings); i++) {
- for (j = 0; j < ST_LSM6DSX_MAX_ID; j++) {
+ for (j = 0; j < ARRAY_SIZE(st_lsm6dsx_sensor_settings[i].id); j++) {
if (st_lsm6dsx_sensor_settings[i].id[j].name &&
id == st_lsm6dsx_sensor_settings[i].id[j].hw_id)
break;
--
2.20.1
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] iio: imu: st_lsm6dsx: Fix reading array out of bounds
2020-04-09 8:58 [PATCH] iio: imu: st_lsm6dsx: Fix reading array out of bounds Alexandre Bard
@ 2020-04-09 9:17 ` Andy Shevchenko
2020-04-09 11:01 ` Stephan Gerhold
2020-04-09 16:44 ` Martin Kepplinger
2 siblings, 0 replies; 8+ messages in thread
From: Andy Shevchenko @ 2020-04-09 9:17 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Alexandre Bard; +Cc: Lorenzo Bianconi, linux-iio
On Thu, Apr 9, 2020 at 12:00 PM Alexandre Bard
<alexandre.bard@netmodule.com> wrote:
>
> Former code was iterating through all possible IDs whereas only a few
> per settings array are really available. Leading to several out of
> bounds readings.
>
> Line is now longer than 80 characters. But since it is a classic for
> loop I think it is better to keep it like this than splitting it.
Agree.
Reviewed-by: Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@gmail.com>
> Signed-off-by: Alexandre Bard <alexandre.bard@netmodule.com>
> ---
> drivers/iio/imu/st_lsm6dsx/st_lsm6dsx_core.c | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/iio/imu/st_lsm6dsx/st_lsm6dsx_core.c b/drivers/iio/imu/st_lsm6dsx/st_lsm6dsx_core.c
> index 84d219ae6aee..be8882ff30eb 100644
> --- a/drivers/iio/imu/st_lsm6dsx/st_lsm6dsx_core.c
> +++ b/drivers/iio/imu/st_lsm6dsx/st_lsm6dsx_core.c
> @@ -1350,7 +1350,7 @@ static int st_lsm6dsx_check_whoami(struct st_lsm6dsx_hw *hw, int id,
> int err, i, j, data;
>
> for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(st_lsm6dsx_sensor_settings); i++) {
> - for (j = 0; j < ST_LSM6DSX_MAX_ID; j++) {
> + for (j = 0; j < ARRAY_SIZE(st_lsm6dsx_sensor_settings[i].id); j++) {
> if (st_lsm6dsx_sensor_settings[i].id[j].name &&
> id == st_lsm6dsx_sensor_settings[i].id[j].hw_id)
> break;
> --
> 2.20.1
>
--
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] iio: imu: st_lsm6dsx: Fix reading array out of bounds
2020-04-09 8:58 [PATCH] iio: imu: st_lsm6dsx: Fix reading array out of bounds Alexandre Bard
2020-04-09 9:17 ` Andy Shevchenko
@ 2020-04-09 11:01 ` Stephan Gerhold
2020-04-09 11:50 ` Alexandre Bard
2020-04-09 16:44 ` Martin Kepplinger
2 siblings, 1 reply; 8+ messages in thread
From: Stephan Gerhold @ 2020-04-09 11:01 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Alexandre Bard; +Cc: lorenzo.bianconi83, linux-iio
On Thu, Apr 09, 2020 at 10:58:18AM +0200, Alexandre Bard wrote:
> Former code was iterating through all possible IDs whereas only a few
> per settings array are really available. Leading to several out of
> bounds readings.
>
> Line is now longer than 80 characters. But since it is a classic for
> loop I think it is better to keep it like this than splitting it.
>
> Signed-off-by: Alexandre Bard <alexandre.bard@netmodule.com>
> ---
> drivers/iio/imu/st_lsm6dsx/st_lsm6dsx_core.c | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/iio/imu/st_lsm6dsx/st_lsm6dsx_core.c b/drivers/iio/imu/st_lsm6dsx/st_lsm6dsx_core.c
> index 84d219ae6aee..be8882ff30eb 100644
> --- a/drivers/iio/imu/st_lsm6dsx/st_lsm6dsx_core.c
> +++ b/drivers/iio/imu/st_lsm6dsx/st_lsm6dsx_core.c
> @@ -1350,7 +1350,7 @@ static int st_lsm6dsx_check_whoami(struct st_lsm6dsx_hw *hw, int id,
> int err, i, j, data;
>
> for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(st_lsm6dsx_sensor_settings); i++) {
> - for (j = 0; j < ST_LSM6DSX_MAX_ID; j++) {
> + for (j = 0; j < ARRAY_SIZE(st_lsm6dsx_sensor_settings[i].id); j++) {
id in st_lsm6dsx_settings is declared as:
struct {
enum st_lsm6dsx_hw_id hw_id;
const char *name;
} id[ST_LSM6DSX_MAX_ID];
so it's always ST_LSM6DSX_MAX_ID long
(additional entries are just zero-initialized).
Isn't ARRAY_SIZE(st_lsm6dsx_sensor_settings[i].id) == ST_LSM6DSX_MAX_ID
in this case?
> if (st_lsm6dsx_sensor_settings[i].id[j].name &&
> id == st_lsm6dsx_sensor_settings[i].id[j].hw_id)
> break;
> --
> 2.20.1
>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] iio: imu: st_lsm6dsx: Fix reading array out of bounds
2020-04-09 11:01 ` Stephan Gerhold
@ 2020-04-09 11:50 ` Alexandre Bard
2020-04-09 11:58 ` Lorenzo Bianconi
2020-04-09 12:09 ` Stephan Gerhold
0 siblings, 2 replies; 8+ messages in thread
From: Alexandre Bard @ 2020-04-09 11:50 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Stephan Gerhold; +Cc: lorenzo.bianconi83, linux-iio
Le 09.04.20 à 13:01, Stephan Gerhold a écrit :
> On Thu, Apr 09, 2020 at 10:58:18AM +0200, Alexandre Bard wrote:
>> Former code was iterating through all possible IDs whereas only a few
>> per settings array are really available. Leading to several out of
>> bounds readings.
>>
>> Line is now longer than 80 characters. But since it is a classic for
>> loop I think it is better to keep it like this than splitting it.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Alexandre Bard <alexandre.bard@netmodule.com>
>> ---
>> drivers/iio/imu/st_lsm6dsx/st_lsm6dsx_core.c | 2 +-
>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/iio/imu/st_lsm6dsx/st_lsm6dsx_core.c b/drivers/iio/imu/st_lsm6dsx/st_lsm6dsx_core.c
>> index 84d219ae6aee..be8882ff30eb 100644
>> --- a/drivers/iio/imu/st_lsm6dsx/st_lsm6dsx_core.c
>> +++ b/drivers/iio/imu/st_lsm6dsx/st_lsm6dsx_core.c
>> @@ -1350,7 +1350,7 @@ static int st_lsm6dsx_check_whoami(struct st_lsm6dsx_hw *hw, int id,
>> int err, i, j, data;
>>
>> for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(st_lsm6dsx_sensor_settings); i++) {
>> - for (j = 0; j < ST_LSM6DSX_MAX_ID; j++) {
>> + for (j = 0; j < ARRAY_SIZE(st_lsm6dsx_sensor_settings[i].id); j++) {
> id in st_lsm6dsx_settings is declared as:
>
> struct {
> enum st_lsm6dsx_hw_id hw_id;
> const char *name;
> } id[ST_LSM6DSX_MAX_ID];
>
> so it's always ST_LSM6DSX_MAX_ID long
> (additional entries are just zero-initialized).
>
> Isn't ARRAY_SIZE(st_lsm6dsx_sensor_settings[i].id) == ST_LSM6DSX_MAX_ID
> in this case?
Yes, you are right, I missed that. But there is still a problem :
parsing 0-initialized fields can lead to a false positive when looking for the
value ST_LSM6DS3_ID which is the first element of an enum. So either the enum
must be patched to start at 1 or the length of valid ids in a settings must be
retrieved somehow.
Or is there another way ? Or am I wrong ?
>
>> if (st_lsm6dsx_sensor_settings[i].id[j].name &&
>> id == st_lsm6dsx_sensor_settings[i].id[j].hw_id)
>> break;
>> --
>> 2.20.1
>>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] iio: imu: st_lsm6dsx: Fix reading array out of bounds
2020-04-09 11:50 ` Alexandre Bard
@ 2020-04-09 11:58 ` Lorenzo Bianconi
2020-04-09 12:09 ` Stephan Gerhold
1 sibling, 0 replies; 8+ messages in thread
From: Lorenzo Bianconi @ 2020-04-09 11:58 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Alexandre Bard; +Cc: Stephan Gerhold, lorenzo.bianconi83, linux-iio
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2337 bytes --]
> Le 09.04.20 à 13:01, Stephan Gerhold a écrit :
> > On Thu, Apr 09, 2020 at 10:58:18AM +0200, Alexandre Bard wrote:
> >> Former code was iterating through all possible IDs whereas only a few
> >> per settings array are really available. Leading to several out of
> >> bounds readings.
> >>
> >> Line is now longer than 80 characters. But since it is a classic for
> >> loop I think it is better to keep it like this than splitting it.
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Alexandre Bard <alexandre.bard@netmodule.com>
> >> ---
> >> drivers/iio/imu/st_lsm6dsx/st_lsm6dsx_core.c | 2 +-
> >> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >>
> >> diff --git a/drivers/iio/imu/st_lsm6dsx/st_lsm6dsx_core.c b/drivers/iio/imu/st_lsm6dsx/st_lsm6dsx_core.c
> >> index 84d219ae6aee..be8882ff30eb 100644
> >> --- a/drivers/iio/imu/st_lsm6dsx/st_lsm6dsx_core.c
> >> +++ b/drivers/iio/imu/st_lsm6dsx/st_lsm6dsx_core.c
> >> @@ -1350,7 +1350,7 @@ static int st_lsm6dsx_check_whoami(struct st_lsm6dsx_hw *hw, int id,
> >> int err, i, j, data;
> >>
> >> for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(st_lsm6dsx_sensor_settings); i++) {
> >> - for (j = 0; j < ST_LSM6DSX_MAX_ID; j++) {
> >> + for (j = 0; j < ARRAY_SIZE(st_lsm6dsx_sensor_settings[i].id); j++) {
> > id in st_lsm6dsx_settings is declared as:
> >
> > struct {
> > enum st_lsm6dsx_hw_id hw_id;
> > const char *name;
> > } id[ST_LSM6DSX_MAX_ID];
> >
> > so it's always ST_LSM6DSX_MAX_ID long
> > (additional entries are just zero-initialized).
> >
> > Isn't ARRAY_SIZE(st_lsm6dsx_sensor_settings[i].id) == ST_LSM6DSX_MAX_ID
> > in this case?
> Yes, you are right, I missed that. But there is still a problem :
> parsing 0-initialized fields can lead to a false positive when looking for the
> value ST_LSM6DS3_ID which is the first element of an enum. So either the enum
> must be patched to start at 1 or the length of valid ids in a settings must be
> retrieved somehow.
for un-initialized entries st_lsm6dsx_sensor_settings[i].id[j].name will be NULL
so I guess there is no issue there. Am I missing something?
Regards,
Lorenzo
>
> Or is there another way ? Or am I wrong ?
> >
> >> if (st_lsm6dsx_sensor_settings[i].id[j].name &&
> >> id == st_lsm6dsx_sensor_settings[i].id[j].hw_id)
> >> break;
> >> --
> >> 2.20.1
> >>
[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 228 bytes --]
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] iio: imu: st_lsm6dsx: Fix reading array out of bounds
2020-04-09 11:50 ` Alexandre Bard
2020-04-09 11:58 ` Lorenzo Bianconi
@ 2020-04-09 12:09 ` Stephan Gerhold
2020-04-09 12:14 ` Alexandre Bard
1 sibling, 1 reply; 8+ messages in thread
From: Stephan Gerhold @ 2020-04-09 12:09 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Alexandre Bard; +Cc: lorenzo.bianconi83, linux-iio
On Thu, Apr 09, 2020 at 01:50:24PM +0200, Alexandre Bard wrote:
> Le 09.04.20 à 13:01, Stephan Gerhold a écrit :
> > On Thu, Apr 09, 2020 at 10:58:18AM +0200, Alexandre Bard wrote:
> >> Former code was iterating through all possible IDs whereas only a few
> >> per settings array are really available. Leading to several out of
> >> bounds readings.
> >>
> >> Line is now longer than 80 characters. But since it is a classic for
> >> loop I think it is better to keep it like this than splitting it.
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Alexandre Bard <alexandre.bard@netmodule.com>
> >> ---
> >> drivers/iio/imu/st_lsm6dsx/st_lsm6dsx_core.c | 2 +-
> >> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >>
> >> diff --git a/drivers/iio/imu/st_lsm6dsx/st_lsm6dsx_core.c b/drivers/iio/imu/st_lsm6dsx/st_lsm6dsx_core.c
> >> index 84d219ae6aee..be8882ff30eb 100644
> >> --- a/drivers/iio/imu/st_lsm6dsx/st_lsm6dsx_core.c
> >> +++ b/drivers/iio/imu/st_lsm6dsx/st_lsm6dsx_core.c
> >> @@ -1350,7 +1350,7 @@ static int st_lsm6dsx_check_whoami(struct st_lsm6dsx_hw *hw, int id,
> >> int err, i, j, data;
> >>
> >> for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(st_lsm6dsx_sensor_settings); i++) {
> >> - for (j = 0; j < ST_LSM6DSX_MAX_ID; j++) {
> >> + for (j = 0; j < ARRAY_SIZE(st_lsm6dsx_sensor_settings[i].id); j++) {
> > id in st_lsm6dsx_settings is declared as:
> >
> > struct {
> > enum st_lsm6dsx_hw_id hw_id;
> > const char *name;
> > } id[ST_LSM6DSX_MAX_ID];
> >
> > so it's always ST_LSM6DSX_MAX_ID long
> > (additional entries are just zero-initialized).
> >
> > Isn't ARRAY_SIZE(st_lsm6dsx_sensor_settings[i].id) == ST_LSM6DSX_MAX_ID
> > in this case?
> Yes, you are right, I missed that. But there is still a problem :
> parsing 0-initialized fields can lead to a false positive when looking for the
> value ST_LSM6DS3_ID which is the first element of an enum. So either the enum
> must be patched to start at 1 or the length of valid ids in a settings must be
> retrieved somehow.
>
> Or is there another way ? Or am I wrong ?
ST_LSM6DS3_ID was indeed broken, which is why I added a .name != NULL
check in commit fb4fbc8904e7 ("iio: imu: st_lsm6dsx: Fix selection of ST_LSM6DS3_ID").
.name is only set for properly initialized IDs, so this ensures that we
do not match any zero-initialized entries. :)
> >
> >> if (st_lsm6dsx_sensor_settings[i].id[j].name &&
> >> id == st_lsm6dsx_sensor_settings[i].id[j].hw_id)
> >> break;
> >> --
> >> 2.20.1
> >>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] iio: imu: st_lsm6dsx: Fix reading array out of bounds
2020-04-09 12:09 ` Stephan Gerhold
@ 2020-04-09 12:14 ` Alexandre Bard
0 siblings, 0 replies; 8+ messages in thread
From: Alexandre Bard @ 2020-04-09 12:14 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Stephan Gerhold; +Cc: lorenzo.bianconi83, linux-iio
> On Thu, Apr 09, 2020 at 01:50:24PM +0200, Alexandre Bard wrote:
>> Le 09.04.20 à 13:01, Stephan Gerhold a écrit :
>>> On Thu, Apr 09, 2020 at 10:58:18AM +0200, Alexandre Bard wrote:
>>>> Former code was iterating through all possible IDs whereas only a few
>>>> per settings array are really available. Leading to several out of
>>>> bounds readings.
>>>>
>>>> Line is now longer than 80 characters. But since it is a classic for
>>>> loop I think it is better to keep it like this than splitting it.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Alexandre Bard <alexandre.bard@netmodule.com>
>>>> ---
>>>> drivers/iio/imu/st_lsm6dsx/st_lsm6dsx_core.c | 2 +-
>>>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/drivers/iio/imu/st_lsm6dsx/st_lsm6dsx_core.c b/drivers/iio/imu/st_lsm6dsx/st_lsm6dsx_core.c
>>>> index 84d219ae6aee..be8882ff30eb 100644
>>>> --- a/drivers/iio/imu/st_lsm6dsx/st_lsm6dsx_core.c
>>>> +++ b/drivers/iio/imu/st_lsm6dsx/st_lsm6dsx_core.c
>>>> @@ -1350,7 +1350,7 @@ static int st_lsm6dsx_check_whoami(struct st_lsm6dsx_hw *hw, int id,
>>>> int err, i, j, data;
>>>>
>>>> for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(st_lsm6dsx_sensor_settings); i++) {
>>>> - for (j = 0; j < ST_LSM6DSX_MAX_ID; j++) {
>>>> + for (j = 0; j < ARRAY_SIZE(st_lsm6dsx_sensor_settings[i].id); j++) {
>>> id in st_lsm6dsx_settings is declared as:
>>>
>>> struct {
>>> enum st_lsm6dsx_hw_id hw_id;
>>> const char *name;
>>> } id[ST_LSM6DSX_MAX_ID];
>>>
>>> so it's always ST_LSM6DSX_MAX_ID long
>>> (additional entries are just zero-initialized).
>>>
>>> Isn't ARRAY_SIZE(st_lsm6dsx_sensor_settings[i].id) == ST_LSM6DSX_MAX_ID
>>> in this case?
>> Yes, you are right, I missed that. But there is still a problem :
>> parsing 0-initialized fields can lead to a false positive when looking for the
>> value ST_LSM6DS3_ID which is the first element of an enum. So either the enum
>> must be patched to start at 1 or the length of valid ids in a settings must be
>> retrieved somehow.
>>
>> Or is there another way ? Or am I wrong ?
> ST_LSM6DS3_ID was indeed broken, which is why I added a .name != NULL
> check in commit fb4fbc8904e7 ("iio: imu: st_lsm6dsx: Fix selection of ST_LSM6DS3_ID").
>
> .name is only set for properly initialized IDs, so this ensures that we
> do not match any zero-initialized entries. :)
Right, I actually fell on this problem in an older version where .name did not
exist and I did not understand that it was added for this purpose when I checked
out the master branch.
Looks alright then.
Thanks for the feedback.
Best regards,
Alexandre Bard
>
>>>> if (st_lsm6dsx_sensor_settings[i].id[j].name &&
>>>> id == st_lsm6dsx_sensor_settings[i].id[j].hw_id)
>>>> break;
>>>> --
>>>> 2.20.1
>>>>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] iio: imu: st_lsm6dsx: Fix reading array out of bounds
2020-04-09 8:58 [PATCH] iio: imu: st_lsm6dsx: Fix reading array out of bounds Alexandre Bard
2020-04-09 9:17 ` Andy Shevchenko
2020-04-09 11:01 ` Stephan Gerhold
@ 2020-04-09 16:44 ` Martin Kepplinger
2 siblings, 0 replies; 8+ messages in thread
From: Martin Kepplinger @ 2020-04-09 16:44 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Alexandre Bard, lorenzo.bianconi83; +Cc: linux-iio
On 09.04.20 10:58, Alexandre Bard wrote:
> Former code was iterating through all possible IDs whereas only a few
> per settings array are really available. Leading to several out of
> bounds readings.
>
> Line is now longer than 80 characters. But since it is a classic for
> loop I think it is better to keep it like this than splitting it.
>
> Signed-off-by: Alexandre Bard <alexandre.bard@netmodule.com>
> ---
> drivers/iio/imu/st_lsm6dsx/st_lsm6dsx_core.c | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/iio/imu/st_lsm6dsx/st_lsm6dsx_core.c b/drivers/iio/imu/st_lsm6dsx/st_lsm6dsx_core.c
> index 84d219ae6aee..be8882ff30eb 100644
> --- a/drivers/iio/imu/st_lsm6dsx/st_lsm6dsx_core.c
> +++ b/drivers/iio/imu/st_lsm6dsx/st_lsm6dsx_core.c
> @@ -1350,7 +1350,7 @@ static int st_lsm6dsx_check_whoami(struct st_lsm6dsx_hw *hw, int id,
> int err, i, j, data;
>
> for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(st_lsm6dsx_sensor_settings); i++) {
> - for (j = 0; j < ST_LSM6DSX_MAX_ID; j++) {
> + for (j = 0; j < ARRAY_SIZE(st_lsm6dsx_sensor_settings[i].id); j++) {
> if (st_lsm6dsx_sensor_settings[i].id[j].name &&
> id == st_lsm6dsx_sensor_settings[i].id[j].hw_id)
> break;
>
Tested-by: Martin Kepplinger <martin.kepplinger@puri.sm>
thanks
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2020-04-09 16:44 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2020-04-09 8:58 [PATCH] iio: imu: st_lsm6dsx: Fix reading array out of bounds Alexandre Bard
2020-04-09 9:17 ` Andy Shevchenko
2020-04-09 11:01 ` Stephan Gerhold
2020-04-09 11:50 ` Alexandre Bard
2020-04-09 11:58 ` Lorenzo Bianconi
2020-04-09 12:09 ` Stephan Gerhold
2020-04-09 12:14 ` Alexandre Bard
2020-04-09 16:44 ` Martin Kepplinger
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).