lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Message-ID: <20220927070702.1c2da2b8@kernel.org> Date: Tue, 27 Sep 2022 07:07:02 -0700 From: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org> To: Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org> Cc: "Gustavo A. R. Silva" <gustavoars@...nel.org>, Subash Abhinov Kasiviswanathan <quic_subashab@...cinc.com>, Sean Tranchetti <quic_stranche@...cinc.com>, "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>, netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-hardening@...r.kernel.org, Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org> Subject: Re: [PATCH][next] net: ethernet: rmnet: Replace zero-length array with DECLARE_FLEX_ARRAY() helper On Mon, 26 Sep 2022 19:22:30 -0700 Kees Cook wrote: > > Not directly related to this patch, but I just had to look at pahole > > output for sk_buff and the struct_group() stuff makes is really painful > > to read :/ Offsets for the members are relative to the "group" and they > > are all repeated. > > > > Is there any chance you could fix that? Before we sprinkle more pixie > > dust around, perhaps? > > Unfortunately I don't see a way around it until we can make changes to > the C language spec, and that's measured in decades. :( I think BPF folks have had some success adding C extensions, like tagging. Some form of attribute would really look so much better than this DECLARE_FLEX_ARRAY() macro indirection. Maybe it's just me :( > Perhaps we could add some kind of heuristic to pahole to "hide" one of > the internal struct_group() copies, and to hide the empty flexible-array > wrapper structs? (pahole already can't tell the difference between a > 0-length array and a flexible-array.) Would that be workable? That'd be my knee-jerk fix, too. Or at least render the offsets for the anonymous side of the union as absolute rather than relative.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists