Hi, Le dimanche 21 août 2016 à 22:15 +0200, SF Markus Elfring a écrit : > > > > > > > > > > > > > Don't introduce a defect in patch 1 and correct > > > > that introduced defect in patch 2. > > > Which detail do you not like here? > > > > See above. > > This feedback is not clearer. >
It's clear enough: your second patch fixes an issue you introduced in your first patch by removing the code which made use of the ret initialization value: - if (copy_from_user(buf, p, len)) - goto free; > I find that the two update steps should work in principle, > shouldn't they? > It would be better to squash them here. Regards. -- Yann Droneaud OPTEYA
