linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH net-next v2 3/9] lib: packing: add pack_fields() and unpack

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: <20241103103142.4ba70d58@kernel.org>
Date: Sun, 3 Nov 2024 10:31:42 -0800
From: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
To: Jacob Keller <jacob.e.keller@...el.com>
Cc: Vladimir Oltean <olteanv@...il.com>, Andrew Morton
 <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>, Paolo
 Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>, Tony Nguyen <anthony.l.nguyen@...el.com>,
 Przemek Kitszel <przemyslaw.kitszel@...el.com>, Masahiro Yamada
 <masahiroy@...nel.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
 netdev@...r.kernel.org, Vladimir Oltean <vladimir.oltean@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v2 3/9] lib: packing: add pack_fields() and
 unpack_fields()

On Fri, 25 Oct 2024 17:04:55 -0700 Jacob Keller wrote:
> +ifdef CONFIG_PACKING_CHECK_FIELDS_1
> +HOSTCFLAGS_lib/gen_packing_checks.o += -DPACKING_CHECK_FIELDS_1
> +endif
> +ifdef CONFIG_PACKING_CHECK_FIELDS_2
> +HOSTCFLAGS_lib/gen_packing_checks.o += -DPACKING_CHECK_FIELDS_2
> +endif
[...]
> +ifdef CONFIG_PACKING_CHECK_FIELDS_49
> +HOSTCFLAGS_lib/gen_packing_checks.o += -DPACKING_CHECK_FIELDS_49
> +endif
> +ifdef CONFIG_PACKING_CHECK_FIELDS_50
> +HOSTCFLAGS_lib/gen_packing_checks.o += -DPACKING_CHECK_FIELDS_50

This series is marked as Not Applicable in PW. Not sure why.

I can't bring myself to revive it, tho, this isn't pretty. 
It'd be one thing to do the codegen and the ugly copy / paste
50 times in the lib/ but all drivers have to select all field 
counts they use..

Since all you want is compile time checking and logic is quite
well constrained - can we put the field definitions in a separate
ro section and make modpost validate them?

Also Documentation needs to be extended with basic use examples.