On Wed, 18 Dec 2024 19:42:22 +0800 Edward Adam Davis <eada...@qq.com> wrote:
> Reported-by: syzbot+345e4443a21200874...@syzkaller.appspotmail.com > Closes: https://syzkaller.appspot.com/bug?extid=345e4443a21200874b18 > Signed-off-by: Edward Adam Davis <eada...@qq.com> > --- > V1 -> V2: updated according to Vincent Donnefort's suggestion, to avoid > repeating the (nr_subbufs + 1) << subbuf_order > > kernel/trace/ring_buffer.c | 6 +++++- > 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) Also, when sending a new version of a patch, do not reply to the previous version as that hides the new patch. It should start a new thread. Otherwise it screws up tooling and also hides patches. I've missed patches because they were replied to the previous patch. It makes it much harder on the maintainer when someone does that. What I usually do to maintain a history chain is have: Signed-off-by: ... --- Changes since v1: https://lore.kernel.org/all/tencent_e036a29600368e4a2075a7774d67023cf...@qq.com/ - Updated according to Vincent Donnefort's suggestion, to avoid repeating the (nr_subbufs + 1) << subbuf_order -- Steve
