linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] regulator: da9063: Annotate struct da9063_regulators with __counted

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: <cc654fb0-6e13-46ca-a5cc-d9fa103219e4@sirena.org.uk>
Date:   Fri, 6 Oct 2023 21:56:25 +0100
From:   Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
To:     Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
Cc:     Liam Girdwood <lgirdwood@...il.com>,
        Support Opensource <support.opensource@...semi.com>,
        Nathan Chancellor <nathan@...nel.org>,
        Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@...gle.com>,
        Tom Rix <trix@...hat.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        llvm@...ts.linux.dev, linux-hardening@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] regulator: da9063: Annotate struct da9063_regulators
 with __counted_by

On Fri, Oct 06, 2023 at 01:40:08PM -0700, Kees Cook wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 22, 2023 at 10:52:07AM -0700, Kees Cook wrote:

> > Prepare for the coming implementation by GCC and Clang of the __counted_by
> > attribute. Flexible array members annotated with __counted_by can have
> > their accesses bounds-checked at run-time checking via CONFIG_UBSAN_BOUNDS
> > (for array indexing) and CONFIG_FORTIFY_SOURCE (for strcpy/memcpy-family
> > functions).
> > 
> > As found with Coccinelle[1], add __counted_by for struct da9063_regulators.

> Friendly ping. Mark can you pick this up?

Please don't send content free pings and please allow a reasonable time
for review.  People get busy, go on holiday, attend conferences and so 
on so unless there is some reason for urgency (like critical bug fixes)
please allow at least a couple of weeks for review.  If there have been
review comments then people may be waiting for those to be addressed.

Sending content free pings adds to the mail volume (if they are seen at
all) which is often the problem and since they can't be reviewed
directly if something has gone wrong you'll have to resend the patches
anyway, so sending again is generally a better approach though there are
some other maintainers who like them - if in doubt look at how patches
for the subsystem are normally handled.

Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (489 bytes)