linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH][next] ALSA: kunit: make read-only array buf

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: <81a9e3c2-2c44-406e-af19-90d9dcfe4a92@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 26 Apr 2024 13:05:34 +0100
From: Ivan Orlov <ivan.orlov0322@...il.com>
To: Takashi Sakamoto <o-takashi@...amocchi.jp>,
 Colin Ian King <colin.i.king@...il.com>, Jaroslav Kysela <perex@...ex.cz>,
 Takashi Iwai <tiwai@...e.com>, linux-sound@...r.kernel.org,
 kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH][next] ALSA: kunit: make read-only array buf_samples
 static const

On 4/26/24 00:22, Takashi Sakamoto wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> On Thu, Apr 25, 2024 at 05:07:54PM +0100, Colin Ian King wrote:
>> Don't populate the read-only array buf_samples on the stack at
>> run time, instead make it static const.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Colin Ian King <colin.i.king@...il.com>
>> ---
>>   sound/core/sound_kunit.c | 2 +-
>>   1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/sound/core/sound_kunit.c b/sound/core/sound_kunit.c
>> index eb90f62228c0..e34c4317f5eb 100644
>> --- a/sound/core/sound_kunit.c
>> +++ b/sound/core/sound_kunit.c
>> @@ -167,7 +167,7 @@ static void _test_fill_silence(struct kunit *test, struct snd_format_test_data *
>>   
>>   static void test_format_fill_silence(struct kunit *test)
>>   {
>> -	u32 buf_samples[] = { 10, 20, 32, 64, 129, SILENCE_BUFFER_MAX_FRAMES };
>> +	static const u32 buf_samples[] = { 10, 20, 32, 64, 129, SILENCE_BUFFER_MAX_FRAMES };
>>   	u8 *buffer;
>>   	u32 i, j;
> 
> Reviewed-by: Takashi Sakamoto <o-takashi@...amocchi.jp>
> 
> We can see the other similar cases in the kunit file. I'll post the fix
> later.
> 

Hi Takashi,

Hmm, correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't see any other significant 
allocations on the stack in the test.

-- 
Kind regards,
Ivan Orlov