From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S261434AbTH2QUh (ORCPT ); Fri, 29 Aug 2003 12:20:37 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S261449AbTH2QUh (ORCPT ); Fri, 29 Aug 2003 12:20:37 -0400 Received: from smtp-105-friday.noc.nerim.net ([62.4.17.105]:1552 "EHLO mallaury.noc.nerim.net") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S261434AbTH2QUc (ORCPT ); Fri, 29 Aug 2003 12:20:32 -0400 Date: Fri, 29 Aug 2003 18:21:32 +0200 From: Jean Delvare To: "Robert T. Johnson" Cc: greg@kroah.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, marcelo@conectiva.com.br, sensors@Stimpy.netroedge.com, vsu@altlinux.ru Subject: Re: [PATCH 2.4] i2c-dev user/kernel bug and mem leak Message-Id: <20030829182132.29c3ac55.khali@linux-fr.org> In-Reply-To: <1062033440.16799.22.camel@dooby.cs.berkeley.edu> References: <20030803192312.68762d3c.khali@linux-fr.org> <20030804193212.11786d06.vsu@altlinux.ru> <20030805103240.02221bed.khali@linux-fr.org> <20030805210704.GA5452@kroah.com> <20030806100702.78298ffe.khali@linux-fr.org> <1060886657.1006.7121.camel@dooby.cs.berkeley.edu> <20030814190954.GA2492@kroah.com> <1060912895.1006.7160.camel@dooby.cs.berkeley.edu> <20030815211329.GB4920@kroah.com> <1062033440.16799.22.camel@dooby.cs.berkeley.edu> X-Mailer: Sylpheed version 0.9.4 (GTK+ 1.2.10; i686-pc-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org > Here's the patch against 2.6.0-test4. Just to remind everyone, this > patch doesn't fix any bugs (they're already fixed in 2.6.0-test3), it > just makes the code pass our static analysis tool, cqual, without > generating a warning. Since finding and fixing these bugs is so > tricky, it seems worthwhile to have code which can be automatically > verified to be bug-free (at least w.r.t. user/kernel pointers). > That's what this patch is about. Let me know if you have any > questions or comments. Thanks for everyone's help. If I read the patch correctly, this is basically a kind of reversal to your original patch, before Sergey and I changed it? -- Jean Delvare http://www.ensicaen.ismra.fr/~delvare/