[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <202107281358.8E12638@keescook>
Date: Wed, 28 Jul 2021 14:01:24 -0700
From: Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
To: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
Cc: linux-hardening@...r.kernel.org,
"Gustavo A. R. Silva" <gustavoars@...nel.org>,
Keith Packard <keithpac@...zon.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org,
netdev@...r.kernel.org, dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org,
linux-staging@...ts.linux.dev, linux-block@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kbuild@...r.kernel.org, clang-built-linux@...glegroups.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 19/64] ip: Use struct_group() for memcpy() regions
On Wed, Jul 28, 2021 at 07:55:53AM +0200, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> > struct ethhdr {
> > - unsigned char h_dest[ETH_ALEN]; /* destination eth addr */
> > - unsigned char h_source[ETH_ALEN]; /* source ether addr */
> > + union {
> > + struct {
> > + unsigned char h_dest[ETH_ALEN]; /* destination eth addr */
> > + unsigned char h_source[ETH_ALEN]; /* source ether addr */
> > + };
> > + struct {
> > + unsigned char h_dest[ETH_ALEN]; /* destination eth addr */
> > + unsigned char h_source[ETH_ALEN]; /* source ether addr */
> > + } addrs;
>
> A union of the same fields in the same structure in the same way?
>
> Ah, because struct_group() can not be used here? Still feels odd to see
> in a userspace-visible header.
Yeah, there is some inconsistency here. I will clean this up for v2.
Is there a place we can put kernel-specific macros for use in UAPI
headers? (I need to figure out where things like __kernel_size_t get
defined...)
--
Kees Cook
Powered by blists - more mailing lists