On Tue Jul 16, 2024 at 4:04 AM EEST, Hao Ge wrote: > Hi Jarkko > > Have a nice day. > > On 7/15/24 19:25, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote: > > On Tue Jul 9, 2024 at 5:33 AM EEST, Hao Ge wrote: > >> From: Hao Ge <gehao@xxxxxxxxxx> > >> > >> We shouldn't dereference "auth" until after we have checked that it is > >> non-NULL. > >> > >> Fixes: 7ca110f2679b ("tpm: Address !chip->auth in tpm_buf_append_hmac_session*()") > >> Signed-off-by: Hao Ge <gehao@xxxxxxxxxx> > > Also lacking: > > > > Reported-by: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@xxxxxxxxxx> > > Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-integrity/3b1755a9-b12f-42fc-b26d-de2fe4e13ec2@stanley.mountain/T/#u > > Regarding this version, I don't think I should add these. > > I send this patch on July 9th, 2024. > > The following email was sent on July 13th, 2024. > > https://lore.kernel.org/linux-integrity/3b1755a9-b12f-42fc-b26d-de2fe4e13ec2@stanley.mountain/T/#u > > I think these should be included in the subsequent versions (if any). OK sorry, then you are right. > > > > > What is happening here is that my commit exposed pre-existing bug to > > static analysis but it did not introduce a new regression. I missed > > from your patch how did you ended up to your conclusions. > > > > Please *do not* ignore the sources next time. Either explain how the bug > > was found or provide the reporting source. You are essentially taking > > credit and also blame from the work that you did not accomplish > > yourself, which is both wrong and dishonest. > > > > BR, Jarkko > > OK,got it,I'll pay more attention to such details in the future. > > I would like to clarify that I did not taking credit and dishonest. OK, cool, and I do agree, and I'm sorry what I said. Please just add the necessary details and send v2 then. BRR, Jarkko