linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] printk: Do not lose last line in kmsg dump

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

Date:   Wed, 10 Jul 2019 17:39:10 +0900
From:   Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky.work@...il.com>
To:     Petr Mladek <pmladek@...e.com>
Cc:     Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky.work@...il.com>,
        Vincent Whitchurch <vincent.whitchurch@...s.com>,
        Vincent Whitchurch <rabinv@...s.com>,
        sergey.senozhatsky@...il.com, rostedt@...dmis.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] printk: Do not lose last line in kmsg dump

On (07/09/19 16:29), Petr Mladek wrote:
> 
> Anyway, if nobody vetoes the patch, I would schedule it for 5.4.
> We are already in the merge window and it deserves some testing
> in linux-next.
> 

I don't really want to veto it, but I'm not comfortable with fixing
off-by-one error by introducing another off-by-one error. The former
one leads to a missing message, the latter one to memory corruption.
Given that Vincent did find the code which does `buf[len] = 0x00'
[kudos to Vincent] let's have a better solution here. Otherwise, the
patch can make it to -stable via AUTOSEL machinery and then "we have
a problem".

Objections?

	-ss