linux-kernel - Re: [Suggestion] kernel/rcutorture.c: about using scnprintf() instead of sprintf().

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]

Message-ID: <20131013110518.GC5790@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Date:	Sun, 13 Oct 2013 04:05:18 -0700
From:	"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To:	Chen Gang <gang.chen@...anux.com>
Cc:	josh@...edesktop.org,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [Suggestion] kernel/rcutorture.c: about using scnprintf()
 instead of sprintf().

On Tue, Oct 08, 2013 at 04:32:53PM +0800, Chen Gang wrote:
> Hello Maintainers:
> 
> In srcu_torture_stats(), if cpus are more than 1K, the PAGE_SIZE will
> not be enough.
> 
> In rcu_torture_printk(), the 'page' maximized size is 4096, it has a
> function pointer for printing, which not tell its maximized length.
> 
> Welcome any additional suggestions or completions.

I never have run rcutorture on a system with that many CPUs.  ;-)

Given that rcutorture is not used in production, my approach would be to
fix this when I encountered it.  But what change would you suggest, and,
more importantly, how would you go about testing it before submitting
a patch?

Or if you are simply reporting this as a bug, please let me know that.

							Thanx, Paul

--
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/