[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CACRpkdaYcdjkXpUZywK=oyFQdp0FWeD2sjz2ZrSYtjrBo6u+sw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 12 Apr 2023 14:25:36 +0200
From: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>
To: Haibo Li <haibo.li@...iatek.com>
Cc: a.anurag@...sung.com, alexander.sverdlin@...ia.com,
angelogioacchino.delregno@...labora.com, ardb@...nel.org,
catalin.marinas@....com, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mediatek@...ts.infradead.org,
linux@...linux.org.uk, matthias.bgg@...il.com,
rmk+kernel@...linux.org.uk, xiaoming.yu@...iatek.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ARM:unwind:fix unwind abort for uleb128 case
On Wed, Apr 12, 2023 at 4:44 AM Haibo Li <haibo.li@...iatek.com> wrote:
> > Since we're decoding a 32 bit unsigned long maybe break the loop after max
> > 5 bytes (35 bits)? Or are we sure this will not happen?
> in case of some corrupted memory containing say 0xff 0xff 0xff ...,the loop breaks after
> max 4 bytes(decode as max 28 bits)
You're obviously right, I must have been too tired to understand the
==sizeof() break;
Thanks!
Linus Walleij
Powered by blists - more mailing lists