[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CA+DvKQ+bp7Y7gmaVhacjv9uF6Ar-o4tet872h4Q8RPYPJjcJQA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2022 10:15:59 -0500
From: Daniel Micay <danielmicay@...il.com>
To: Marco Elver <elver@...gle.com>
Cc: Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>, llvm@...ts.linux.dev,
Pekka Enberg <penberg@...nel.org>,
David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>,
Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@....com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>, linux-mm@...ck.org,
stable@...r.kernel.org,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>,
Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux.com>,
Nathan Chancellor <nathan@...nel.org>,
Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@...gle.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-hardening@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm: Handle ksize() vs __alloc_size by forgetting size
Looked through them and nearly all seem easy to replace.
By the way, the call to ksize in arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/amd.c
doesn't look right. It allocates the memory with kmemdup. I don't see
how it can assume that the padding is zero, and that seems to be a
requirement since it zeroes the destination before copying to it.
Seems far more reasonable to add a field with the size.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists