linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2] tracing: make ftrace_print_array_seq compute buf

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, 29 Apr 2015 17:12:21 +0100
From:	Javi Merino <javi.merino@....com>
To:	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
CC:	Alex Bennée <alex.bennee@...aro.org>,
	"mingo@...hat.com" <mingo@...hat.com>,
	Dave P Martin <Dave.Martin@....com>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>,
	"Peter Zijlstra (Intel)" <peterz@...radead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] tracing: make ftrace_print_array_seq compute buf_len

On Wed, Apr 29, 2015 at 05:06:22PM +0100, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> On Wed, 29 Apr 2015 17:02:50 +0100
> Alex Bennée <alex.bennee@...aro.org> wrote:
> 
> > 
> > Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org> writes:
> > 
> > > On Wed, 29 Apr 2015 16:18:46 +0100
> > > Alex Bennée <alex.bennee@...aro.org> wrote:
> > >
> > >> The only caller to this function (__print_array) was getting it wrong by
> > >> passing the array length instead of buffer length. As the element size
> > >> was already being passed for other reasons it seems reasonable to push
> > >> the calculation of buffer length into the function.
> > >> 
> > >> Signed-off-by: Alex Bennée <alex.bennee@...aro.org>
> > >
> > > Thanks, I'll add a stable tag to this too, and get it out soon.
> > 
> > I take it you'll pick up Dave's reviewed-by?
> 
> Yep, I will.
> 
> > 
> > As for CC'ing stable I wouldn't worry too much as nothing in the kernel
> > uses __print_array yet (unless you count the example). But it is a
> > fairly trivial patch so if you as the maintainer is happy I'm happy ;-)
> 
> OK, if it's not used, then I'll just add it to this release.

Our maintainer missed the merge window (sigh) so the patches that were
going to use this will have to wait until linux v4.2.  So they will be
users in the future, but there's no need for this to go to stable.

Cheers,
Javi