linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] init - fix building bug and potential buffer overflow

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:	Fri, 16 May 2008 00:44:27 +0200
From:	Rene Herman <rene.herman@...access.nl>
To:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
CC:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Cyrill Gorcunov <gorcunov@...il.com>, geert@...ux-m68k.org,
	zippel@...ux-m68k.org, schwab@...e.de,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-m68k@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] init - fix building bug and potential buffer overflow

On 15-05-08 23:15, Linus Torvalds wrote:

> Talking about cleanups, why the *hell* does print_fn_descriptor_symbol() 
> take an "unsigned long", when every single user would want to give it a 
> pointer?
> 
> Would somebody please want to move that cast into the macro (or better 
> yet, make it an inline function that takes a 'void *'), and remove all the 
> casts from the callers?

[ ... ]

> +		print_fn_descriptor_symbol("calling  %s()\n",
> +				(unsigned long) call);


And while that person is at it, could he or she please remove the silly 
() from the "foo+0x0/0x1234()" (or the "foo+0x0/0x1234 [bar]()" or the 
"0x12345678()").

Rene.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/