linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH next v2 1/2] printk: avoid and/or handle record truncation

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]

Date:   Wed, 30 Sep 2020 12:30:50 +0206
From:   John Ogness <john.ogness@...utronix.de>
To:     Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@...il.com>
Cc:     Petr Mladek <pmladek@...e.com>,
        Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky.work@...il.com>,
        Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@...il.com>,
        Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Marek Szyprowski <m.szyprowski@...sung.com>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH next v2 1/2] printk: avoid and/or handle record truncation

On 2020-09-30, Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@...il.com> wrote:
> On (20/09/30 11:07), John Ogness wrote:
>>  bool prb_reserve_in_last(struct prb_reserved_entry *e, struct printk_ringbuffer *rb,
>> -			 struct printk_record *r, u32 caller_id);
>> +			 struct printk_record *r, u32 caller_id, unsigned int max_size);
>
> Isn't `max_size' always LOG_LINE_MAX?

Yes. But I still think it makes sense that it is an argument of the
function. It is quite an important setting and hard-coding it within the
ringbuffer code might lead to hidden problems later.

John Ogness