linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH net-next] ntp: fix size argument for kcalloc

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: <2230e0ee-2bf4-4d86-b81d-1615125d3084@intel.com>
Date: Thu, 4 Jul 2024 12:17:39 +0200
From: Przemek Kitszel <przemyslaw.kitszel@...el.com>
To: Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>
CC: <oss-drivers@...igine.com>, <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
	<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <louis.peens@...igine.com>,
	<kuba@...nel.org>, <davem@...emloft.net>, <edumazet@...gle.com>,
	<horms@...nel.org>, <yinjun.zhang@...igine.com>, <johannes.berg@...el.com>,
	<ryno.swart@...igine.com>, <ziyang.chen@...igine.com>, <linma@....edu.cn>,
	<niklas.soderlund@...igine.com>, Chen Ni <nichen@...as.ac.cn>, "Sebastian
 Andrzej Siewior" <bigeasy@...utronix.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] ntp: fix size argument for kcalloc

On 7/4/24 11:41, Paolo Abeni wrote:
> On Thu, 2024-07-04 at 11:36 +0200, Paolo Abeni wrote:
>> On Wed, 2024-07-03 at 11:16 +0200, Przemek Kitszel wrote:
>>> On 7/3/24 04:56, Chen Ni wrote:
>>>> The size argument to kcalloc should be the size of desired structure,
>>>
>>> xsk_pools is a double pointer, so not "desired structure" but rather you
>>> should talk about an element size.
>>>
>>>> not the pointer to it.
>>>>
>>>> Fixes: 6402528b7a0b ("nfp: xsk: add AF_XDP zero-copy Rx and Tx support")
>>>
>>> even if the the behavior is not changed, the fix should be targeted to
>>> net tree
>>
>> This patch is IMHO more a cleanup than a real fix. As such it's more
>> suited for net-next. For the same reason I think it should not go to
>> stable, so I'm dropping the fixes tag, too.

I'm fine with targeting it at any of the trees.

But I still believe it is a fix, even if a trivial one, and even if code
"works" - it's a "wrong" code.

Here I received similar feedback in a similar case:
https://www.mail-archive.com/intel-wired-lan@osuosl.org/msg03252.html
and I changed my mind then.

> 
> Thinking again about it, this patch has a few things to be cleaned-up.
> 
> @Chen Ni, please submit a new revision, adjusting the subj and commit
> message as per Przemek and Simon feedback and dropping the fixes tag,
> still targeting net-next.
> 
> You can retain the already collected tags.
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Paolo
>