From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755374AbaEEI3z (ORCPT ); Mon, 5 May 2014 04:29:55 -0400 Received: from mail-ee0-f49.google.com ([74.125.83.49]:39546 "EHLO mail-ee0-f49.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755242AbaEEI3x (ORCPT ); Mon, 5 May 2014 04:29:53 -0400 Date: Mon, 5 May 2014 10:29:48 +0200 From: Levente Kurusa To: Dominique van den Broeck Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] staging/rtl8192e: userspace ptr deref + incorrect declarations Message-ID: <20140505082948.GA2581@linux.com> References: <1399214787-15675-1-git-send-email-domdevlin@free.fr> <20140504174823.GA26361@linux.com> <1399247989.2485.6.camel@wisdom> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="Nq2Wo0NMKNjxTN9z" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1399247989.2485.6.camel@wisdom> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org --Nq2Wo0NMKNjxTN9z Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi, On Mon, May 05, 2014 at 01:59:49AM +0200, Dominique van den Broeck wrote: >=20 > Good evening, >=20 > Forgive my mistakes, I sent only a few patches yet and I'm still learning. > Nevertheless: Not a problem at all, since that is what the challenge is for. >=20 > > What is that period in the commit message? And the semicolon? >=20 > Semicolons is what one use to ponctuate an enumerated list (at least > in french). In fact, it was their primary use before computer era. >=20 > Is there something wrong with it ? I check all my patches with > checkpatch.pl --strict before sending them and it didn't seem to > complain... Oh, I see now! Well I guess it's better to have a commit message that says WHY the change is good and WHAT did it change, not just a list of what you did. i.e. in this case you could also inline the sparse warning or at least a part of it. >=20 > > You should also be a bit more specific. Also, the Subject line is > > very bad. Better go with something like this: > >=20 > > staging: rtl8192e: fix userspace pointer dereference >=20 > Right. I used the slash as a subpart of the tree. Didn't know what > was the best for this situation. That is good as well, I just prefer the latter one, but feel free to use whichever you feel better. :-) >=20 > > And when you resend a patchset, please resend the full patchset. >=20 > I usually do but I've got an acceptation message for the first one > (see below). >=20 In that case, that's good. > > This is totally unneccessary. >=20 > Should at least have gone in the body below indeed. >=20 > > When you cite a commit please don't include the full hash, that is > > non informational. Better put the first 7 characters of the hash and > > the first line of the commit message as well in parantheses, like so: > > > > 5169af2 ("Staging: rtl8192e: Fix declaration of symbols") > > (I even have a command for this in vim :-) ) >=20 > I'm interested. I use vim too. >=20 I have this: ----------%<----------- function! GetGitCommit(commit) exec ":.!git log --oneline --pretty=3D\"format:\\%h ('\\%s')\" ".a:comm= it." -1" endfunction ---------->%----------- > > Are you sure that 1/2 was applied to the staging tree? > > It's unlikely that 1/2 is applied while 2/2 is left alone. >=20 > As stated before, I received the common automatic mail from > Greg KH regarding this one. So I'll now wait before I do a v3 > for this issue. If so, I'll resent the complete set if required. No, if that was applied it's unneccessary to resend the full set. >=20 > > Oh, I am unable to find commit b5c8d48 in Linus' or staging-next. > > In which tree is it? >=20 > It's linux-next. If I quote a commit, I should the tree as well, > indeed. But since the v1 was performed partially for the Eudyptula > Project and since it was a response to a modification request,=20 > I though it was implicit. No, the tree's name is not needed. In fact, I should have checked it in linux-next, but I only checked Linus', and staging-next thinking, since you said it was applied, it was applied to staging-next. :-) >=20 > > Could you please as well remove that empty line in the declarations? >=20 > I'll do. > Cheers. Regards, Levente Kurusa --Nq2Wo0NMKNjxTN9z Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: Digital signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux) iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJTZ0v8AAoJELBqK2lO9dZB3wsH/26UHFEuEC0eIfhgf7NIKJ3P 5WNO/eyQ1y9MOIpt+fifGYSmgBkkPC2bLCvFshQs21tmbPp62JhmXBz3BcFfCRUN WlvnuCK+6Uf3DGut87WDfxCMQNRpELf/0jl/8SARrjnUR4JeXp+HiB9pqq7XepHs 9RDyS8gTPN0buDqCurC3EOoP6JYk3po7TSL2XE8HEVU3z5kUT/nvU4QYIOBK13rM bZE/64fu3UvVtzUmG6r5rYXnOALEBPSFQJzTBtJbyDdarq7c9qIRT2rEX1tGszVn 131TjvVXDA9Nm3ufTMQgZikfk2kfOn7SvNJiFIVDVof6/8Hu0RNDaAuI4JUhT3w= =C27E -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Nq2Wo0NMKNjxTN9z--