From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1758604AbXFBHAn (ORCPT ); Sat, 2 Jun 2007 03:00:43 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1754785AbXFBHAf (ORCPT ); Sat, 2 Jun 2007 03:00:35 -0400 Received: from ug-out-1314.google.com ([66.249.92.171]:59830 "EHLO ug-out-1314.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754694AbXFBHAe (ORCPT ); Sat, 2 Jun 2007 03:00:34 -0400 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=received:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version:content-type:content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; b=O1sqqNjNENQ4kiWV/+diWA6pFQmIT1xekgy0PdOLYl06D1B8Dx0y9/JGaTg8WNzFxjMmEoxKBQtW3VrEdxzRESi3PQ7FMfl2Dzk/AyHNvufdKF3of0Hb8DApcAmCr8/HLrWdbQ66d5VzCqCXR9oxp36+5Uh82OklTN1e1I4asmU= Date: Sat, 2 Jun 2007 10:59:23 +0400 From: Cyrill Gorcunov To: Andrew Morton Cc: Cyrill Gorcunov , Eric Sandeen , Jan Kara , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] Fix possible leakage of blocks in UDF Message-ID: <20070602065923.GB8387@cvg> References: <20070524170554.GC19709@duck.suse.cz> <20070524203653.GA7693@duck.suse.cz> <465DF0B4.2050203@sandeen.net> <20070601211036.GA23975@duck.suse.cz> <46609FBD.5040407@sandeen.net> <20070601154834.53558d1b.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <4660FD7F.4090302@sandeen.net> <20070601224339.c803e04e.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <20070602063403.GA8387@cvg> <20070601235422.fdc1f750.akpm@linux-foundation.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20070601235422.fdc1f750.akpm@linux-foundation.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.13 (2006-08-11) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org [Andrew Morton - Fri, Jun 01, 2007 at 11:54:22PM -0700] | On Sat, 2 Jun 2007 10:34:03 +0400 Cyrill Gorcunov wrote: | | > | That patch is DOA, methinks. | > | | > | > Andrew, what does it mean - "DOA"? Dead on arrival? | | yes - I dropped it. | But that could lead to rejection of my code-style-conversion patch... Should I remake them? Actually Jan was right, the current state of UDF (without his patches) could lead to lost blocks and his patch must be just fixed I think. Cyrill