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  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]
Date:   Sat, 22 Aug 2020 13:14:19 -0700
From:   Markus Mayer <mmayer@...adcom.com>
To:     Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org>
Cc:     Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>,
        Colin Ian King <colin.king@...onical.com>,
        BCM Kernel Feedback <bcm-kernel-feedback-list@...adcom.com>,
        Linux ARM Kernel <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
        Linux Kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] memory: brcmstb_dpfe: fix array index out of bounds

On Sat, 22 Aug 2020 at 09:46, Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org> wrote:
>
> On Sat, Aug 22, 2020 at 09:40:59AM -0700, Markus Mayer wrote:
> > On Sat, 22 Aug 2020 at 04:56, Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Fri, Aug 21, 2020 at 09:52:21AM -0700, Markus Mayer wrote:
> > > > We would overrun the error_text array if we hit a TIMEOUT condition,
> > > > because we were using the error code "ETIMEDOUT" (which is 110) as an
> > > > array index.
> > > >
> > > > We fix the problem by correcting the array index and by providing a
> > > > function to retrieve error messages rather than accessing the array
> > > > directly. The function includes a bounds check that prevents the array
> > > > from being overrun.
> > > >
> > > > This patch was prepared in response to
> > > >     https://lkml.org/lkml/2020/8/18/505.
> > > >
> > > > Signed-off-by: Markus Mayer <mmayer@...adcom.com>
> > >
> > > Your Signed-off-by does not match From field. Please run
> > > scripts/checkpatch on every patch you send.
> > >
> > > I fixed it up, assuming markus.mayer@...adcom.com is the valid email
> > > address.
> >
> > No. I have always been using mmayer@...adcom.com since it is shorter.
> > That's also what's in the MAINTAINERS file. Please change it back. I
> > accidentally used the long form for one of my e-mail replies which is
> > where the confusion must have originated.
>
> I'll drop the patch then. You need to resend with SoB matching email.

Oh, I am starting to see what's happening here. This is new and
apparently due to some changes with the mail server setup on our end.

I have this in my patch file:

$ head 0001-memory-brcmstb_dpfe-fix-array-index-out-of-bounds.patch
>From 6b424772d4c84fa56474b2522d0d3ed6b2b2b360 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Markus Mayer <mmayer@...adcom.com>
Date: Fri, 21 Aug 2020 08:56:52 -0700

Sending patches like this used to work. Clearly our SMTP server has
now taken it upon itself to rewrite the sender e-mail address. I
wasn't expecting that. Let me look into it. Sorry for the hassle. It
was not intentional.

Regards,
-Markus

> Best regards,
> Krzysztof

Powered by blists - more mailing lists