linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] qed: fix uninitialized data in aRFS intrastructure

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Thu, 11 May 2017 17:01:18 +0200
From:   Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
To:     "Mintz, Yuval" <Yuval.Mintz@...ium.com>
Cc:     "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        "netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] qed: fix uninitialized data in aRFS intrastructure

On Thu, May 11, 2017 at 4:37 PM, Mintz, Yuval <Yuval.Mintz@...ium.com> wrote:
>> > For the most part - I'm almost all in favor of this change.
>> > But just to make it clear - the actual fix could have been a one-liner, right?
>> > The rest are style changes.
>
>> Correct. Having the correct length in the memset is a sufficient fix for the warning,
>> but it felt wrong to send it since the root of the problem seems to be the
>> complexity of the code that was hiding it.
>
> ...
>
>> Generally speaking, feel free to treat any of my compile-time warning fix
>> patches as simple bug reports and apply a different fix that seems more
>> appropriate. I mainly send it in patch form since that seems to be the
>> quickest way to address any issues.
>
> Sure.
>
> Once net-next is re-opened I intend to push our next FW version which
> is also going to change some of the aRFS related configurations.
>
> So I think we should stick to the single-liner fix for now,
> and I'll revise the style [if still needed; I'll have to check] on that submission.

Sounds good, thanks!

     Arnd