From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932199AbbFDQiL (ORCPT ); Thu, 4 Jun 2015 12:38:11 -0400 Received: from mail-ie0-f173.google.com ([209.85.223.173]:35272 "EHLO mail-ie0-f173.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753381AbbFDQiH (ORCPT ); Thu, 4 Jun 2015 12:38:07 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <55705670.9000808@gmx.de> References: <20150601184437.GA2534@ls3530.box> <55705670.9000808@gmx.de> Date: Thu, 4 Jun 2015 09:38:07 -0700 X-Google-Sender-Auth: jNGpzFkASZhrAaNz6sYOHk-1AGM Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH] compat: fix possible out-of-bound accesses in compat_get_bitmap() and compat_put_bitmap() From: Linus Torvalds To: Helge Deller Cc: Al Viro , Linux Kernel Mailing List Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Jun 4, 2015 at 6:45 AM, Helge Deller wrote: > > Do you want me to send it again cleaned up, or will you just take yours? I'd prefer to get a re-send, I've already nuked the patch from me tree. These days, 99% of the patches I write are throw-away stuff just for this kind of "how about this" email exchange. I do it that way partly because I'm lazy (ok, _mostly_ because I'm lazy, except then the explanation emails like this are actually more work than just doing it myself - but I tell myself that it makes it easier for me be lazy in the long run ;^). But partly it's because it makes it more natural to credit the person who actually reported the issue (the patch itself is *much* less important than the fact that somebody noticed the problem in the first place), and also partly because sometimes the patches may need some extra tender care and loving ("Oh, the patch I sent out didn't actually compile, and it burnt down your house? Yeah, it was just a general 'wouldn't this way be nicer' thing, not a serious patch"). Linus