linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 5.14 018/334] nbd: add the check to prevent overflow in __nbd

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Mon, 13 Sep 2021 13:10:21 -0700
From:   Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To:     Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@...gle.com>
Cc:     Sedat Dilek <sedat.dilek@...il.com>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Naresh Kamboju <naresh.kamboju@...aro.org>,
        Nathan Chancellor <natechancellor@...il.com>,
        Baokun Li <libaokun1@...wei.com>,
        open list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-stable <stable@...r.kernel.org>,
        Hulk Robot <hulkci@...wei.com>,
        Josef Bacik <josef@...icpanda.com>,
        Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>, Sasha Levin <sashal@...nel.org>,
        clang-built-linux <clang-built-linux@...glegroups.com>,
        lkft-triage@...ts.linaro.org, llvm@...ts.linux.dev,
        Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5.14 018/334] nbd: add the check to prevent overflow in __nbd_ioctl()

On Mon, Sep 13, 2021 at 1:02 PM Nick Desaulniers
<ndesaulniers@...gle.com> wrote:
>
> Ha! I pulled+rebased and this code disappeared...I thought I had
> rebased on the wrong branch or committed work to master accidentally.
> Patch to stable-only inbound.

Side note: for stable, can you look into using _Generic() instead of
__builtin_choose_expression() with typeof, or some
__builtin_types_compatible_p() magic?

Yes, yes, we use __builtin_choose_expression() elsewhere, but we've
started using _Generic(), and it's really the more natural model - in
addition to being the standard C one.

Of course, there may be some reason why _Generic() doesn't work, but
it _is_ the natural fit for any "for type X, do Y" kind of thing.

No?

          Linus