linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] usnic: avoid overly large buffers on stack

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]

Message-ID: <20190912134722.GA26019@mellanox.com>
Date:   Thu, 12 Sep 2019 13:47:37 +0000
From:   Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...lanox.com>
To:     Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
CC:     Christian Benvenuti <benve@...co.com>,
        Nelson Escobar <neescoba@...co.com>,
        Parvi Kaustubhi <pkaustub@...co.com>,
        Doug Ledford <dledford@...hat.com>,
        Leon Romanovsky <leon@...nel.org>,
        Gal Pressman <galpress@...zon.com>,
        Parav Pandit <parav@...lanox.com>,
        Davidlohr Bueso <dave@...olabs.net>,
        Kamal Heib <kamalheib1@...il.com>,
        Florian Westphal <fw@...len.de>,
        "linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org" <linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] usnic: avoid overly large buffers on stack

On Fri, Sep 06, 2019 at 05:57:17PM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> It's never a good idea to put a 1000-byte buffer on the kernel
> stack. The compiler warns about this instance when usnic_ib_log_vf()
> gets inlined into usnic_ib_pci_probe():
> 
> drivers/infiniband/hw/usnic/usnic_ib_main.c:543:12: error: stack frame size of 1044 bytes in function 'usnic_ib_pci_probe' [-Werror,-Wframe-larger-than=]
> 
> As this is only called for debugging purposes in the setup path,
> it's trivial to convert to a dynamic allocation.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
> ---
>  drivers/infiniband/hw/usnic/usnic_ib_main.c | 10 ++++++++--
>  1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

Applied to for-next, thanks

Jason