From: Miquel Raynal <miquel.raynal@bootlin.com>
To: Linus Walleij <linusw@kernel.org>
Cc: Pengpeng Hou <pengpeng@iscas.ac.cn>,
Richard Weinberger <richard@nod.at>,
Vignesh Raghavendra <vigneshr@ti.com>,
Liviu Dudau <liviu.dudau@arm.com>,
linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
stable@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 RESEND] mtd: afs: validate v2 image info bounds
Date: Mon, 13 Jul 2026 19:03:07 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87bjcag6us.fsf@bootlin.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAD++jL=APPmdAg1y6igZ5qxihUAMkjvRUZ26gmCBGdoA-N5edg@mail.gmail.com> (Linus Walleij's message of "Thu, 9 Jul 2026 23:48:11 +0200")
Hi Linus,
> I don't know if this is stable material. No-one is running into any
> regressions, I think this was discovered by code analysis and
> is mostly theoretical problems.
Thanks for the detailed analysis, I also feel like many of these patches
do not fix actual regression, but I am inclined to take them as long as
they do not darken too much the code. In this case, except the very last
change, I am hesitating.
Shall Pengeng extract the last bit (which is useful) and drop the rest?
Thanks,
Miquèl
______________________________________________________
Linux MTD discussion mailing list
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-mtd/
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Miquel Raynal <miquel.raynal@bootlin.com>
To: Linus Walleij <linusw@kernel.org>
Cc: Pengpeng Hou <pengpeng@iscas.ac.cn>,
Richard Weinberger <richard@nod.at>,
Vignesh Raghavendra <vigneshr@ti.com>,
Liviu Dudau <liviu.dudau@arm.com>,
linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
stable@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 RESEND] mtd: afs: validate v2 image info bounds
Date: Mon, 13 Jul 2026 19:03:07 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87bjcag6us.fsf@bootlin.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAD++jL=APPmdAg1y6igZ5qxihUAMkjvRUZ26gmCBGdoA-N5edg@mail.gmail.com> (Linus Walleij's message of "Thu, 9 Jul 2026 23:48:11 +0200")
Hi Linus,
> I don't know if this is stable material. No-one is running into any
> regressions, I think this was discovered by code analysis and
> is mostly theoretical problems.
Thanks for the detailed analysis, I also feel like many of these patches
do not fix actual regression, but I am inclined to take them as long as
they do not darken too much the code. In this case, except the very last
change, I am hesitating.
Shall Pengeng extract the last bit (which is useful) and drop the rest?
Thanks,
Miquèl
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-07-13 17:03 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-07-08 1:49 [PATCH v2 RESEND] mtd: afs: validate v2 image info bounds Pengpeng Hou
2026-07-08 1:49 ` Pengpeng Hou
2026-07-09 21:48 ` Linus Walleij
2026-07-09 21:48 ` Linus Walleij
2026-07-13 17:03 ` Miquel Raynal [this message]
2026-07-13 17:03 ` Miquel Raynal
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=87bjcag6us.fsf@bootlin.com \
--to=miquel.raynal@bootlin.com \
--cc=linusw@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=liviu.dudau@arm.com \
--cc=pengpeng@iscas.ac.cn \
--cc=richard@nod.at \
--cc=stable@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=vigneshr@ti.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.