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:	Tue, 29 May 2012 08:17:17 +0900
From:	Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
To:	Kent Overstreet <koverstreet@...gle.com>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-bcache@...r.kernel.org,
	axboe@...nel.dk, paul.gortmaker@...driver.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] block: convert elevator to generic rb tree code

On Fri, May 25, 2012 at 01:57:41PM -0700, Kent Overstreet wrote:
> Change-Id: I676968e201f0de9a0d0a7813e2fcc6873343e8c3
> 
> Signed-off-by: Kent Overstreet <koverstreet@...gle.com>

You know what I was gonna complain about here, right?  :)

>  struct request *elv_rb_find(struct rb_root *root, sector_t sector)
>  {
> -	struct rb_node *n = root->rb_node;
> -	struct request *rq;
> -
> -	while (n) {
> -		rq = rb_entry(n, struct request, rb_node);
> +	struct request search = { .__sector = sector };

This is dangerous.  You can't put things like struct request on stack.
It might look like it's working ok on the tested setup but archs
differ in stack pressure and more importantly people may add
arbitrarily sized fields, including debugging stuff, to struct
request.  So, no, please don't do that.

Thanks.

-- 
tejun
--
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/

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ