linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v1 1/1] pinctrl: Move for_each_maps() to namespace and hide iterator inside

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]

Date:   Wed, 9 Nov 2022 18:08:33 +0200
From:   Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>
To:     linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc:     Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 1/1] pinctrl: Move for_each_maps() to namespace and
 hide iterator inside

On Wed, Nov 09, 2022 at 05:57:24PM +0200, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> First of all, while for_each_maps() is private to pin control subsystem
> it's still better to have it put into a namespace.
> 
> Besides that, users are not relying on iterator variable, so hide it
> inside for-loop.

...

> +#define for_each_pin_map(_maps_node_, _map_)						\
> +	list_for_each_entry(_maps_node_, &pinctrl_maps, node)				\
> +		for (unsigned int __i = 0;						\

> +		     _map_ = &_maps_node_->maps[__i], __i < _maps_node_->num_maps;	\

Hmm... I think this is actually not okay, if we have maps be NULL and
num_maps = 0, KABOOM is guaranteed.

I will experiment and update this.

Meanwhile, Linus, do you think this change is useful?

> +		     __i++)

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko