linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] fix memory corruption from misinterpreted bad_inode

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

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Thu, 4 Jan 2007 10:14:23 +1100
From:	Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
To:	Eric Sandeen <sandeen@...deen.net>
Cc:	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] fix memory corruption from misinterpreted bad_inode_ops
 return values

Hi Eric,

On Wed, 03 Jan 2007 12:42:47 -0600 Eric Sandeen <sandeen@...deen.net> wrote:
>
> So here's the first stab at fixing it.  I'm sure there are style points
> to be hashed out.  Putting all the functions as static inlines in a header
> was just to avoid hundreds of lines of simple function declarations before
> we get to the meat of bad_inode.c, but it's probably technically wrong to
> put it in a header.  Also if putting a copyright on that trivial header file
> is going overboard, just let me know.  Or if anyone has a less verbose
> but still correct way to address this problem, I'm all ears.

Since the only uses of these functions is to take their addresses, the
inline gains you nothing and since the only uses are in the one file, you
should just define them in that file.

--
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell                    sfr@...b.auug.org.au
http://www.canb.auug.org.au/~sfr/

Content of type "application/pgp-signature" skipped