linux-kernel - Re: arm checkstack

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-Id: <200811051713.15352.arnd@arndb.de>
Date:	Wed, 5 Nov 2008 17:13:14 +0100
From:	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
To:	Jörn Engel <joern@...fs.org>
Cc:	Matthieu CASTET <matthieu.castet@...rot.com>,
	Linux Arm Mailing List 
	<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.arm.linux.org.uk>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: arm checkstack

On Tuesday 04 November 2008, Jörn Engel wrote:
> On Tue, 4 November 2008 17:06:28 +0100, Matthieu CASTET wrote:
> > 
> > I wonder why the arm version of checkstack only catch stack size >= 300
> > and < 10000 [1].
> > Why doesn't it use ".*sub.*sp, sp, #([0-9]{1,8})" to catch all stack usage ?
> 
> Looks like a bug.  And it further looks like Holger just copied what
> everyone else did at the time.  And the one who started this strange
> pattern was: Arnd.
> 
> Arnd, did you have a good reason for choosing the pattern?
> 

don't really remember what I thought back then. Probably I tried to filter
out any function lower than 300 bytes as early as possible and did not think
of the >= 10000 case.

	Arnd <><
--
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/