linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] printk: Fix panic caused by passing log_buf

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: <20180918230537.30448bd7@vmware.local.home>
Date:   Tue, 18 Sep 2018 23:05:37 -0400
From:   Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
To:     Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky.work@...il.com>
Cc:     He Zhe <zhe.he@...driver.com>, pmladek@...e.com,
        sergey.senozhatsky@...il.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] printk: Fix panic caused by passing log_buf_len
 to command line

On Wed, 19 Sep 2018 11:47:54 +0900
Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky.work@...il.com> wrote:

> On (09/18/18 22:43), Steven Rostedt wrote:
> > >  First  - switch to u64 size.
> > >  Second - check for NULL str.
> > >   
> > I think I would switch it around. Check for NULL first, and then switch
> > to u64. It was always an int, do we need to backport converting it to
> > u64 to stable? The NULL check is a definite, the overflow of int
> > shouldn't crash anything.  
> 
> Agreed. This order makes much more sense. Do you mind, tho, to have
> "unsigned int size" in the first patch along with NULL str check?
> Just to silent the checkpatch.
> 

I guess that doesn't hurt. I'd personally would keep it separate (just
fix what's broken), but it's such a slight change, I don't have any
strong feelings about it.

Thanks,


-- Steve