linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2] x86/floppy: use designated initializers

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CAGXu5jLqdRWEyyd8-3f8_jpO3NG_y9oTxmxf67BfGxsh0iGedg@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Tue, 20 Dec 2016 09:02:07 -0800
From:   Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
To:     Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
Cc:     LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
        "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, "x86@...nel.org" <x86@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] x86/floppy: use designated initializers

On Sun, Dec 18, 2016 at 12:00 AM, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org> wrote:
>
> * Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org> wrote:
>
>> Prepare to mark sensitive kernel structures for randomization by making
>> sure they're using designated initializers. These were identified during
>> allyesconfig builds of x86, arm, and arm64, with most initializer fixes
>> extracted from grsecurity.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
>> ---
>> v2:
>>  - aligned rhs of initializer, ingo
>> ---
>>  arch/x86/include/asm/floppy.h | 20 ++++++++++----------
>>  1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/arch/x86/include/asm/floppy.h b/arch/x86/include/asm/floppy.h
>> index 1c7eefe32502..202fe3e1fae8 100644
>> --- a/arch/x86/include/asm/floppy.h
>> +++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/floppy.h
>> @@ -229,18 +229,18 @@ static struct fd_routine_l {
>>       int (*_dma_setup)(char *addr, unsigned long size, int mode, int io);
>>  } fd_routine[] = {
>>       {
>> -             request_dma,
>> -             free_dma,
>> -             get_dma_residue,
>> -             dma_mem_alloc,
>> -             hard_dma_setup
>> +             ._request_dma =         request_dma,
>> +             ._free_dma =            free_dma,
>> +             ._get_dma_residue =     get_dma_residue,
>> +             ._dma_mem_alloc =       dma_mem_alloc,
>> +             ._dma_setup =           hard_dma_setup
>>       },
>>       {
>> -             vdma_request_dma,
>> -             vdma_nop,
>> -             vdma_get_dma_residue,
>> -             vdma_mem_alloc,
>> -             vdma_dma_setup
>> +             ._request_dma =         vdma_request_dma,
>> +             ._free_dma =            vdma_nop,
>> +             ._get_dma_residue =     vdma_get_dma_residue,
>> +             ._dma_mem_alloc =       vdma_mem_alloc,
>> +             ._dma_setup =           vdma_dma_setup
>
> That's not how we organize named initializers, we do:
>
>                 ._request_dma           = vdma_request_dma,
>                 ._free_dma              = vdma_nop,
>                 ._get_dma_residue       = vdma_get_dma_residue,
>                 ._dma_mem_alloc         = vdma_mem_alloc,
>                 ._dma_setup             = vdma_dma_setup
>
> I have fixed up the patch.

Ah-ha, thanks! When I did this patch, I first went looking through the
source but there didn't seem to be a consensus on where to put the
"=". :P Thanks for fixing it up!

-Kees

-- 
Kees Cook
Nexus Security