linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/7] liblockdep: Reduce MAX_LOCK_DEPTH to avoid overflowing lock

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: <20160614211332.GJ30154@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date:	Tue, 14 Jun 2016 23:13:32 +0200
From:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To:	Ben Hutchings <ben@...adent.org.uk>
Cc:	Sasha Levin <sasha.levin@...cle.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	stable@...r.kernel.org, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/7] liblockdep: Reduce MAX_LOCK_DEPTH to avoid
 overflowing lock_chain::depth

On Tue, Jun 14, 2016 at 09:47:53PM +0100, Ben Hutchings wrote:

> Even before that commit, which reduced lock_chain::depth from 8 bits
> to 6, MAX_LOCK_DEPTH was too large.

> -#define MAX_LOCK_DEPTH 2000UL
> +#define MAX_LOCK_DEPTH 63UL

So per that commit; there still is a 4 byte hole we could fill. So if a
bigger number is desired here, there is room to make that happen.

Good to see those assertions did their job, albeit somewhat belated.