On Fri, 26 Jun 2020 19:23:21 +0200 (CEST) Justin Iurman wrote:
> Hi Jakub,
>
> It is an inline modification of the patch 4 of this series. The
> modification in itself cannot be a problem. Maybe I did send it the
> wrong way?
Ah, sorry I didn't notice the threading. Please don't tag fixups like
t
Hi Jakub,
It is an inline modification of the patch 4 of this series. The modification in
itself cannot be a problem. Maybe I did send it the wrong way?
Justin
>> If rhashtable_remove_fast returns an error, a rollback is applied. In
>> that case, an unchecked dereference has been fixed.
>>
>>
On Fri, 26 Jun 2020 10:54:35 +0200 Justin Iurman wrote:
> If rhashtable_remove_fast returns an error, a rollback is applied. In
> that case, an unchecked dereference has been fixed.
>
> Reported-by: kernel test robot
> Reported-by: Dan Carpenter
> Signed-off-by: Justin Iurman
My bot says this
If rhashtable_remove_fast returns an error, a rollback is applied. In
that case, an unchecked dereference has been fixed.
Reported-by: kernel test robot
Reported-by: Dan Carpenter
Signed-off-by: Justin Iurman
---
net/ipv6/ioam6.c | 6 --
1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
dif
