linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4 1/3] efi/cper: Adjust infopfx size to accept an extra space

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: Fri, 21 Jun 2024 10:04:23 +0100
From: Jonathan Cameron <Jonathan.Cameron@...wei.com>
To: Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab+huawei@...nel.org>
CC: Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>, James Morse <james.morse@....com>, Shiju
 Jose <shiju.jose@...wei.com>, Tony Luck <tony.luck@...el.com>, Ard Biesheuvel
	<ardb@...nel.org>, <linux-edac@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-efi@...r.kernel.org>,
	<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 1/3] efi/cper: Adjust infopfx size to accept an extra
 space

On Thu, 20 Jun 2024 20:01:44 +0200
Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab+huawei@...nel.org> wrote:

> Compiling with W=1 with werror enabled produces an error:
> 
> drivers/firmware/efi/cper-arm.c: In function ‘cper_print_proc_arm’:
> drivers/firmware/efi/cper-arm.c:298:64: error: ‘snprintf’ output may be truncated before the last format character [-Werror=format-truncation=]
>   298 |                         snprintf(infopfx, sizeof(infopfx), "%s ", newpfx);
>       |                                                                ^
> drivers/firmware/efi/cper-arm.c:298:25: note: ‘snprintf’ output between 2 and 65 bytes into a destination of size 64
>   298 |                         snprintf(infopfx, sizeof(infopfx), "%s ", newpfx);
>       |                         ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> 
> As the logic there adds an space at the end of infopx buffer.
> Add an extra space to avoid such warning.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab+huawei@...nel.org>

Trivial suggestion inline. Either way LGTM
Reviewed-by: Jonathan Cameron <Jonathan.Cameron@...wei.com>

> ---
>  drivers/firmware/efi/cper-arm.c | 2 +-
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/firmware/efi/cper-arm.c b/drivers/firmware/efi/cper-arm.c
> index fa9c1c3bf168..d9bbcea0adf4 100644
> --- a/drivers/firmware/efi/cper-arm.c
> +++ b/drivers/firmware/efi/cper-arm.c
> @@ -240,7 +240,7 @@ void cper_print_proc_arm(const char *pfx,
>  	int i, len, max_ctx_type;
>  	struct cper_arm_err_info *err_info;
>  	struct cper_arm_ctx_info *ctx_info;
> -	char newpfx[64], infopfx[64];
> +	char newpfx[64], infopfx[65];

Maybe make it explicit so we don't wonder if it was
a typo in future. Something like?

	char newpfx[64];
	char infofx[ARRAY_SIZE(newpfx) + 1];

>  
>  	printk("%sMIDR: 0x%016llx\n", pfx, proc->midr);
>