linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] FS-Cache: print hexadecimal value for special cookies type

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]

Date:   Sat, 27 May 2017 20:31:04 -0400
From:   Jérémy Lefaure <jeremy.lefaure@....epita.fr>
To:     David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>
Cc:     linux-cachefs@...hat.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] FS-Cache: print hexadecimal value for special cookies
 type

On Thu, 27 Apr 2017 16:03:45 +0100
David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com> wrote:

> Jérémy Lefaure <jeremy.lefaure@....epita.fr> wrote:
> 
> > When building object-list.o, gcc 6 raises a warning on the sprintf call
> > in fscache_objlist_show:
> > 
> >   CC      fs/fscache/object-list.o
> > fs/fscache/object-list.c: In function ‘fscache_objlist_show’:
> > fs/fscache/object-list.c:265:19: warning: ‘sprintf’ may write a
> > terminating nul past the end of the destination [-Wformat-overflow=]
> >     sprintf(_type, "%02u", cookie->def->type);
> >                    ^~~~~~
> > fs/fscache/object-list.c:265:4: note: ‘sprintf’ output between 3 and 4
> > bytes into a destination of size 3
> >     sprintf(_type, "%02u", cookie->def->type);
> >     ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> > 
> > Moreover, the documentation says that we should have an hex value for
> > special cookies (see Documentation/filesystems/caching/fscache.txt).
> > 
> > Printing hexadecimal value for special cookies fixes the overflow
> > warning and complies with the documentation.  
> 
> Fine by me.  We don't actually handle special type cookies at the moment, so
> you're not going to see anything other than DT or IX for now anyway.
> 
> I'll push this in the next merge window if that's okay with you.
> 

Hi David,
I didn't clearly say that I'm okay about pushing this patch in my last
answer. I am okay with that.

I don't see this patch in v4.12-rc2. Is there an issue with this patch
or are you waiting for my answer ?

Thanks,
Jérémy