Return-Path: Date: Fri, 9 May 2014 14:50:45 +0300 From: Johan Hedberg To: Petri Gynther Cc: linux-bluetooth@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] hog: Fix report_value_cb() Message-ID: <20140509115045.GA3536@t440s.lan> References: <20140509014001.0A027100DB2@puck.mtv.corp.google.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii In-Reply-To: <20140509014001.0A027100DB2@puck.mtv.corp.google.com> Sender: linux-bluetooth-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Hi Petri, On Thu, May 08, 2014, Petri Gynther wrote: > 1. Fix potential buffer overflow. It would happen in the case: > hogdev->has_report_id == TRUE && report_size == UHID_DATA_MAX > > 2. Adjust function signature to match GAttribNotifyFunc. > > 3. Adjust uHID error handling to mimic uhid_send_input_report() in > profiles/input/device.c > --- > profiles/input/hog.c | 44 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--------------- > 1 file changed, 29 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-) Whenever I see a commit message like this it begs the question: shouldn't these separate fixes be in separate patches? If at all possible please split the patch into smaller ones so that each one contains a single independent fix. That makes it much easier to track exactly which code change maps to which described fix as well the possibility to do some bisecting later in case one of the fixes introduces a bug. Johan