[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20220126212854.6gxffia7vj6cbtbh@sx1>
Date: Wed, 26 Jan 2022 13:28:54 -0800
From: Saeed Mahameed <saeedm@...dia.com>
To: Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
Cc: Leon Romanovsky <leon@...nel.org>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-hardening@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH RESEND] net/mlx5e: Use struct_group() for memcpy() region
On 24 Jan 09:22, Kees Cook wrote:
>In preparation for FORTIFY_SOURCE performing compile-time and run-time
>field bounds checking for memcpy(), memmove(), and memset(), avoid
>intentionally writing across neighboring fields.
>
>Use struct_group() in struct vlan_ethhdr around members h_dest and
>h_source, so they can be referenced together. This will allow memcpy()
>and sizeof() to more easily reason about sizes, improve readability,
>and avoid future warnings about writing beyond the end of h_dest.
>
>"pahole" shows no size nor member offset changes to struct vlan_ethhdr.
>"objdump -d" shows no object code changes.
>
>Cc: Saeed Mahameed <saeedm@...dia.com>
>Cc: Leon Romanovsky <leon@...nel.org>
>Cc: "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>
>Cc: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
>Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org
>Cc: linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org
>Signed-off-by: Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
>---
>Since this results in no binary differences, I will carry this in my tree
>unless someone else wants to pick it up. It's one of the last remaining
>clean-ups needed for the next step in memcpy() hardening.
>---
applied to net-next-mlx5
Thanks,
Saeed.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists