[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <502D6691.5010101@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 16 Aug 2012 14:30:57 -0700
From: David Daney <ddaney.cavm@...il.com>
To: "Kasatkin, Dmitry" <dmitry.kasatkin@...el.com>
CC: herbert@...dor.apana.org.au,
linux-crypto <linux-crypto@...r.kernel.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-security-module <linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: on stack dynamic allocations
On 08/16/2012 02:20 PM, Kasatkin, Dmitry wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Some places in the code uses variable-size allocation on stack..
> For example from hmac_setkey():
>
> struct {
> struct shash_desc shash;
> char ctx[crypto_shash_descsize(hash)];
> } desc;
>
>
> sparse complains
>
> CHECK crypto/hmac.c
> crypto/hmac.c:57:47: error: bad constant expression
>
> I like it instead of kmalloc..
>
> But what is position of kernel community about it?
If you know that the range of crypto_shash_descsize(hash) is bounded,
just use the upper bound.
If the range of crypto_shash_descsize(hash) is unbounded, then the stack
will overflow and ... BOOM!
David Daney
--
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