[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20240221103404.GB352018@kernel.org>
Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2024 10:34:04 +0000
From: Simon Horman <horms@...nel.org>
To: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
Cc: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...nel.org>, Saeed Mahameed <saeedm@...dia.com>,
Leon Romanovsky <leon@...nel.org>,
Zhu Yanjun <yanjun.zhu@...ux.dev>,
"David S . Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
Yevgeny Kliteynik <kliteyn@...dia.com>,
Alex Vesker <valex@...dia.com>, Hamdan Igbaria <hamdani@...dia.com>,
Netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] [v2] net/mlx5: fix possible stack overflows
On Tue, Feb 20, 2024 at 09:11:51AM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 20, 2024, at 09:06, Simon Horman wrote:
> > On Mon, Feb 19, 2024 at 11:04:56AM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
>
> > Hi Arnd,
> >
> > With patch 1/2 in place this code goes on as:
> >
> > switch (action->action_type) {
> > case DR_ACTION_TYP_DROP:
> > memset(buff, 0, sizeof(buff));
> >
> > buff is now a char * rather than an array of char.
> > siceof(buff) doesn't seem right here anymore.
> >
> > Flagged by Coccinelle.
>
> Rihgt, that would be bad. It sounds like we won't use patch 1/2
> after all though, so I think it's going to be fine after all.
> If the mlx5 maintainers still want both patches, I'll rework
> it to use the fixed size.
Ack. I agree that this patch is fine if 1/2 is dropped.
If that is the case feel free to add.
Reviewed-by: Simon Horman <horms@...nel.org>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists