linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 4/5] tracing: Replace MAX_PARAM_PREFIX_LEN with MODULE_NAME

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: <20250728103410.26855bc2@batman.local.home>
Date: Mon, 28 Jul 2025 10:34:10 -0400
From: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
To: Daniel Gomez <da.gomez@...nel.org>
Cc: Petr Pavlu <petr.pavlu@...e.com>, Luis Chamberlain <mcgrof@...nel.org>,
 Sami Tolvanen <samitolvanen@...gle.com>, Daniel Gomez
 <da.gomez@...sung.com>, Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...nel.org>,
 linux-modules@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/5] tracing: Replace MAX_PARAM_PREFIX_LEN with
 MODULE_NAME_LEN

On Mon, 28 Jul 2025 08:48:01 +0200
Daniel Gomez <da.gomez@...nel.org> wrote:

> On 30/06/2025 16.32, Petr Pavlu wrote:
> > Use the MODULE_NAME_LEN definition in module_exists() to obtain the maximum
> > size of a module name, instead of using MAX_PARAM_PREFIX_LEN. The values
> > are the same but MODULE_NAME_LEN is more appropriate in this context.
> > MAX_PARAM_PREFIX_LEN was added in commit 730b69d22525 ("module: check
> > kernel param length at compile time, not runtime") only to break a circular
> > dependency between module.h and moduleparam.h, and should mostly be limited
> > to use in moduleparam.h.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Petr Pavlu <petr.pavlu@...e.com>
> > Cc: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
> > Cc: Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...nel.org>  
> 
> Steven, Masami,
> 
> I'm planning to merge these series into modules-next. I think and Ack/Review
> would be great from you. Otherwise, let me know if you'd rather take this patch
> through tracing instead (in case it looks good from your side).

Acked-by: Steven Rostedt (Google) <rostedt@...dmis.org>

> 
> > ---
> > 
> > As a side note, I suspect the function module_exists() would be better
> > replaced with !!find_module() + RCU locking, but that is a separate issue.

Yeah, that is probably something that should be done too.

Thanks,

-- Steve