Re: [PATCH 2/3] vfs: Fix implicit conversion problem when testing overflow case

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] vfs: Fix implicit conversion problem when testing overflow case
From: Christian Brauner <brauner@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 25 Sep 2024 10:37:46 +0200
Cc: linux-fsdevel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, viro@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, jack@xxxxxxx, stable@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, syzbot+296b1c84b9cbf306e5a0@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, Dave Chinner <david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
In-reply-to: <20240920122851.215641-1-sunjunchao2870@gmail.com>

Unrelated to the semantics but why do you use 2/3 numbering for a single
patch? This is really confusing.

Follow-Ups:
- Re: [PATCH 2/3] vfs: Fix implicit conversion problem when testing overflow case
  - From: Julian Sun

References:
- [PATCH 2/3] vfs: Fix implicit conversion problem when testing overflow case
  - From: Julian Sun

Prev by Date: Re: [PATCH 2/3] vfs: Fix implicit conversion problem when testing overflow case
Next by Date: Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] drm/xe/vm: move xa_alloc to prevent UAF
Previous by thread: Re: [PATCH 2/3] vfs: Fix implicit conversion problem when testing overflow case
Next by thread: Re: [PATCH 2/3] vfs: Fix implicit conversion problem when testing overflow case
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread

[Index of Archives] [Linux Kernel] [Kernel Development Newbies] [Linux USB Devel] [Video for Linux] [Linux Audio Users] [Yosemite Hiking] [Linux Kernel] [Linux SCSI]

Powered by Linux