linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] unwind deferred: Annotate struct unwind_cache with __counted

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: <20251114104952.045805af@gandalf.local.home>
Date: Fri, 14 Nov 2025 10:49:52 -0500
From: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
To: David Laight <david.laight.linux@...il.com>
Cc: Thorsten Blum <thorsten.blum@...ux.dev>, Josh Poimboeuf
 <jpoimboe@...nel.org>, Kees Cook <kees@...nel.org>, "Gustavo A. R. Silva"
 <gustavoars@...nel.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
 linux-hardening@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] unwind deferred: Annotate struct unwind_cache with
 __counted_by

On Fri, 14 Nov 2025 09:56:44 -0500
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org> wrote:

> >   
> > >  	unsigned int		nr_entries;
> > > -	unsigned long		entries[];
> > > +	unsigned long		entries[]; /* Fixed size, not bound by nr_entries */
> > >  };    
> > 
> > Perhaps it should be:
> > 	unsigned long entries[ /* MAX_UNWIND_ENTRIES */ ];  
> 
> Whatever would keep the coccinelle folks from sending more patches.

Thorsten,

Which comment would you feel is more obvious that entries is not bound by
nr_entries and prevent this patch from being sent again?

-- Steve