linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] iio: magnetometer: ak8974: Add __nonstring annotations for unterminated strings

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <202503151455.B8E9F6F1@keescook>
Date: Sat, 15 Mar 2025 14:56:02 -0700
From: Kees Cook <kees@...nel.org>
To: Jonathan Cameron <jic23@...nel.org>
Cc: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
	Lars-Peter Clausen <lars@...afoo.de>, linux-iio@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-hardening@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] iio: magnetometer: ak8974: Add __nonstring annotations
 for unterminated strings

On Sat, Mar 15, 2025 at 06:31:25PM +0000, Jonathan Cameron wrote:
> On Fri, 14 Mar 2025 11:31:09 +0100
> Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org> wrote:
> 
> > On Mon, Mar 10, 2025 at 11:23 PM Kees Cook <kees@...nel.org> wrote:
> > 
> > > When a character array without a terminating NUL character has a static
> > > initializer, GCC 15's -Wunterminated-string-initialization will only
> > > warn if the array lacks the "nonstring" attribute[1]. Mark the arrays
> > > with __nonstring to and correctly identify the char array as "not a C
> > > string" and thereby eliminate the warning.
> > >
> > > Link: https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117178 [1]
> > > Cc: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>
> > > Cc: Jonathan Cameron <jic23@...nel.org>
> > > Cc: Lars-Peter Clausen <lars@...afoo.de>
> > > Cc: linux-iio@...r.kernel.org
> > > Signed-off-by: Kees Cook <kees@...nel.org>  
> > 
> > Fair enough,
> > Reviewed-by: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>
> > 
> Kees,
> 
> I've currently queued this for next cycle as it doesn't feel like a fix
> as such and I've already sent my pull request for the merge window.
> 
> Is it worth rushing it in, or is a fully cycle delay an issue? (6.16)
> 
> If slow is fine, applied to the testing branch of iio.git which gets
> 0-day bot exposure.

No rush needed at all. This is just for cleaning up warnings for the
coming releases of GCC 15 in couple months. Thanks for picking it up!

-- 
Kees Cook