[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20180213171112.GA28598@avx2>
Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2018 20:11:12 +0300
From: Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@...il.com>
To: Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] kstrtox: make kstrtobool_from_user() very strict
On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 06:02:27PM +0200, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 10, 2018 at 11:11 PM, Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@...il.com> wrote:
> > Once upon a time module parameter parsing code accepted
> > 0, 1, y, n, Y and N for boolean values. Gratituous but contained
> > to module code and thus tolerable.
> >
> > Commit ef951599074ba4fad2d0efa0a977129b41e6d203
> > ("lib: move strtobool() to kstrtobool()") promoted that ugly wart
> > to kstrtobool() and, more importantly, kstrtobool_from_user().
> >
> > Later set of accepted values was expanded to "on" and "of".
> > Now there are 6+8=14(!) valid strings for a boolean.
> >
> > This patch reduces set of accepted values to "0" and "1"
> > (with optional newline) in spirit with other kstrto*() functions.
> >
> > I'm starting with kstrtobool_from_user() as it is explicitly designed
> > to be used for interacting with userspace. Currently there are 9 users
> > all debug code, so there is hope.
> >
> > Please send before 4.16 so no real users start to depend on verbose behaviour.
> >
>
> NACK.
> You basically are breaking ABI here. I don't see a zillion patches
> which adds a tons of duplicate code to the corresponding users.
Please do "find . -type f -name '*.[ch]' | xargs grep kstrtobool_from_user -w'
before talking about zillion of patches.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists