linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] libfdt: check return value of fdt_num_mem_rsv() in fdt

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: <530a2dcf-82ad-4e59-a162-5d3080766e6c@canonical.com>
Date: Tue, 2 Jul 2024 22:27:19 +0200
From: Heinrich Schuchardt <heinrich.schuchardt@...onical.com>
To: Markus Elfring <Markus.Elfring@....de>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
 Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>, Saravana Kannan <saravanak@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] libfdt: check return value of fdt_num_mem_rsv() in
 fdt_pack()

On 7/2/24 14:54, Markus Elfring wrote:
>> fdt_num_mem_rsv() may return -FDT_ERR_TRUNCATED.
>> In this case fdt_pack() should propagate the error code.
> 
> 1. Please choose imperative wordings for an improved change description.
>     https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst?h=v6.10-rc6#n94

The current subject is an imperative?

> 
> 2. Would you like to add any tags (like “Fixes” and “Cc”)?

d5db5382c5e5 ("libfdt: Safer access to memory reservations") introduced 
the check that returns the error code. But before that we could simply 
overrun the buffer. I would not know which patch to blame.

Whom do you want to Cc?

> 
> 3. How do you think about to use a summary phrase like “Complete error handling
>     in fdt_pack()”?
> 

Why should I choose a less specific subject?

Best regards

Heinrich