linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH][next] loop: Fix missing max_active argument in alloc

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: <70d5493d-1c33-35ed-cbed-18f4e0bad79a@canonical.com>
Date:   Fri, 19 Mar 2021 15:56:21 +0000
From:   Colin Ian King <colin.king@...onical.com>
To:     Dan Schatzberg <schatzberg.dan@...il.com>
Cc:     Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>, linux-block@...r.kernel.org,
        kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH][next] loop: Fix missing max_active argument in
 alloc_workqueue call

On 19/03/2021 15:54, Dan Schatzberg wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 18, 2021 at 03:16:26PM +0000, Colin King wrote:
>> From: Colin Ian King <colin.king@...onical.com>
>>
>> The 3rd argument to alloc_workqueue should be the max_active count,
>> however currently it is the lo->lo_number that is intended for the
>> loop%d number. Fix this by adding in the missing max_active count.
>>
> 
> Thanks for catching this Colin. I'm fairly new to kernel development.
> Is there some tool I could have run locally to catch this?
> 
I'm using Coverity to find these issues. There is a free version [1],
but the one I use is licensed and has the scan level turned up quite
high to catch more issues than the free service.

Refs: [1] https://scan.coverity.com/projects/linux-next-weekly-scan

Colin