[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <YovmsLwb1c6uzdSx@kernel.org>
Date: Mon, 23 May 2022 22:55:28 +0300
From: Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko@...nel.org>
To: Miguel Ojeda <ojeda@...nel.org>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
rust-for-linux@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@...il.com>,
Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 01/25] kallsyms: avoid hardcoding the buffer size
On Mon, May 23, 2022 at 10:45:11PM +0300, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote:
> On Mon, May 23, 2022 at 04:01:14AM +0200, Miguel Ojeda wrote:
> > From: Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@...il.com>
> >
> > This makes it easier to update the size later on.
> >
>
> This does not really conform to [1].
>
> E.g.
>
> "Declare KSY_NAME_LEN, which describes the maximum length for a kernel
> symbol read by kallsyms from the input. In read_symbol(), define the
> buffer to be of length "KSY_NAME_LEN + 1", which includes the terminator
> character."
>
> would be better.
>
> > Furthermore, a static assert is added to ensure both are updated
> > when that happens. The relationship used is one that keeps the new
> > size (512+1) close to the original buffer size (500).
>
> You must split this then into two patches:
>
> 1. A patch that re-defines the length with KSYM_NAME_LEN, i.e.
> #define KSYM_NAME_LEN 499
> 2. A patch which increases the size and reasoning for that.
>
> Right now bundles two separate changes, which does not conform to [2].
>
> BR, Jarkko
The URL's:
[1] https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/process/submitting-patches.html#describe-changes
[2] https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/process/submitting-patches.html#separate-your-changes
BR, Jarkko
Powered by blists - more mailing lists