linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 0/9] Add dynamic memory allocator support for nolibc

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]

Message-ID: <20220330185152.GK4285@paulmck-ThinkPad-P17-Gen-1>
Date:   Wed, 30 Mar 2022 11:51:52 -0700
From:   "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...nel.org>
To:     Willy Tarreau <w@....eu>
Cc:     Ammar Faizi <ammarfaizi2@...weeb.org>,
        Alviro Iskandar Setiawan <alviro.iskandar@...weeb.org>,
        Nugraha <richiisei@...il.com>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        GNU/Weeb Mailing List <gwml@...r.gnuweeb.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/9] Add dynamic memory allocator support for nolibc

On Wed, Mar 30, 2022 at 04:41:14AM +0200, Willy Tarreau wrote:
> Hi Ammar,
> 
> On Tue, Mar 29, 2022 at 05:20:31PM +0700, Ammar Faizi wrote:
> > On 3/29/22 5:17 PM, Ammar Faizi wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > > 
> > > This is a patchset v2 to add dynamic memory allocator support
> > > for nolibc after 2 RFCs, please review the changes carefully.
> 
> Thank you! For me it's OK for all the series:
> 
> Acked-by: Willy Tarreau <w@....eu>
> 
> I do have a minor comment about the use of __builtin_mul_overflow() here.
> While this code is included in the kernel and mostly for use with kernel
> related stuff, till now I've been careful to support older compilers (I'm
> still seeing 4.8, 4.7 and 4.4 commonly in field). I don't find it urgent,
> but I think that sooner or later it would be nice to implement an
> alternative for compilers missing this builtin, especially if it's the
> only one that prevents older compilers from being used. Probably that
> something like this (untested) would do the job:
> 
> 	if (nmemb && ~(size_t)0 / nmemb < size) {
> 		SET_ERRNO(ENOMEM);
> 		return NULL;
> 	}
> 	size *= nmemb;
> 
> But again, for me it's not a showstopper and can be improved later.
> 
> > Sorry, forgot to replace === with --- in for each patch.
> > Should I resend?
> 
> Let's see what Paul prefers. sed 's/===/---/' on the mbox should fix
> it otherwise a resend will be needed.

Given that I am adding your Acked-by anyway, why not?  ;-)

But please check the commits to make sure that this had the desired
effect.

							Thanx, Paul