linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH V1] um: Fix compilation warnings

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <9f224c54-ce6b-ad8f-3716-f23c4b6f803c@quicinc.com>
Date:   Wed, 15 Feb 2023 13:44:41 +0530
From:   Srinivasarao Pathipati <quic_c_spathi@...cinc.com>
To:     Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>
CC:     Richard Weinberger <richard@....at>,
        anton ivanov <anton.ivanov@...bridgegreys.com>,
        Johannes Berg <johannes@...solutions.net>,
        linux-um <linux-um@...ts.infradead.org>,
        linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V1] um: Fix compilation warnings

Hi Greert Uytterhoeven,

On 2/15/2023 1:37 PM, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> Hi Srinivasarao,
>
> On Wed, Feb 15, 2023 at 6:36 AM Srinivasarao Pathipati
> <quic_c_spathi@...cinc.com> wrote:
>> On 2/15/2023 3:27 AM, Richard Weinberger wrote:
>>> ----- Ursprüngliche Mail -----
>>>> Von: "Srinivasarao Pathipati" <quic_c_spathi@...cinc.com>
>>>> static void sig_handler_common(int sig, struct siginfo *si, mcontext_t *mc)
>>>> {
>>>> -    struct uml_pt_regs r;
>>>> +    struct uml_pt_regs *r;
>>>>       int save_errno = errno;
>>>>
>>>> -    r.is_user = 0;
>>>> +    r = malloc(sizeof(struct uml_pt_regs));
>>> I fear this is not correct since malloc() is not async-signal safe.
>> Thanks Richard for quick response. Could you please suggest alternative
>> function of malloc() with async-signal safe.
>>
>> if that is not possible Is there any other way to fix this warning? OR
>> do we need to live with that warning?
> Does this limit actually apply to this file, which calls into the host OS?
>
> How come you even see this warning, as we have
>
>      CFLAGS_signal.o += -Wframe-larger-than=4096
>
> since commit 517f60206ee5d5f7 ("um: Increase stack frame size threshold
> for signal.c") in v5.11?
>
> Gr{oetje,eeting}s,
>
>                          Geert

We were testing this on 5.10 kernel.

We will back port this change.

Thanks