linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH][trivial] crypto: tcrypt

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:	Wed, 25 Feb 2009 11:40:13 -0800
From:	Greg KH <gregkh@...e.de>
To:	Frank Seidel <fseidel@...e.de>
Cc:	Thiago Galesi <thiagogalesi@...il.com>,
	Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>,
	linux kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	linux-crypto@...r.kernel.org, Frank Seidel <frank@...eidel.de>,
	akpm@...ux-foundation.org, "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
	nhorman@...driver.com, lho@...c.com, kaber@...sh.net,
	darrenrjenkins@...il.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH][trivial] crypto: tcrypt - reduce stack size

On Wed, Feb 25, 2009 at 03:34:11PM +0100, Frank Seidel wrote:
> Thiago Galesi wrote:
> > If you write static char output[1024]; (even inside a function) it's
> > not allocated on the stack.
> 
> Oh, yes i misunderstood Herbert, sorry. But anyway isn't
> it preferred to kmalloc such arrays?
> Greg, i thought it was you who told me so, is that right?

Generally, yes, it is preferred.  But if it can be static, that's fine
too.

thanks,

greg k-h
--
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/