From: "Robert T. Johnson" <rtjohnso@eecs.berkeley.edu>
To: Jean Delvare <khali@linux-fr.org>
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
Date: 29 Aug 2003 10:30:50 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1062178250.2321.20.camel@dooby.cs.berkeley.edu> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20030829182132.29c3ac55.khali@linux-fr.org>
On Fri, 2003-08-29 at 09:21, Jean Delvare wrote:
> > 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?
You're absolutely right. The patch is purely "aesthetic", in the sense
that it gets the code to pass cqual without generating any warnings. I
understand the code may seem slightly odd, but it can be _automatically_
verified to have no user/kernel bugs. That's its real advantage.
Thanks for looking at the patch so carefully, and for your comments.
Best,
Rob
prev parent reply other threads:[~2003-08-29 17:31 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2003-08-03 17:23 PATCH: 2.4.22-pre7 drivers/i2c/i2c-dev.c user/kernel bug and mem leak Jean Delvare
2003-08-04 15:32 ` Sergey Vlasov
2003-08-05 8:32 ` Jean Delvare
2003-08-05 14:10 ` Sergey Vlasov
2003-08-05 21:07 ` Greg KH
2003-08-06 8:07 ` [PATCH 2.4] i2c-dev " Jean Delvare
[not found] ` <1060886657.1006.7121.camel@dooby.cs.berkeley.edu>
[not found] ` <20030814190954.GA2492@kroah.com>
2003-08-15 2:01 ` Robert T. Johnson
2003-08-15 21:13 ` Greg KH
2003-08-15 22:17 ` Robert T. Johnson
2003-08-15 23:51 ` Greg KH
2003-08-18 0:54 ` Robert T. Johnson
2003-08-18 21:05 ` Greg KH
2003-09-10 23:02 ` CQual 0.99 Released: user/kernel pointer bug finding tool Robert T. Johnson
2003-08-28 1:17 ` [PATCH 2.4] i2c-dev user/kernel bug and mem leak Robert T. Johnson
2003-08-29 16:21 ` Jean Delvare
2003-08-29 17:30 ` Robert T. Johnson [this message]
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=1062178250.2321.20.camel@dooby.cs.berkeley.edu \
--to=rtjohnso@eecs.berkeley.edu \
--cc=greg@kroah.com \
--cc=khali@linux-fr.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=marcelo@conectiva.com.br \
--cc=sensors@Stimpy.netroedge.com \
--cc=vsu@altlinux.ru \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox