netdev - Re: [PATCH] hns3: work around stack size warning

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: <20250612073253.2abdd54e@kernel.org>
Date: Thu, 12 Jun 2025 07:32:53 -0700
From: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
To: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
Cc: Jijie Shao <shaojijie@...wei.com>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...nel.org>, Jian
 Shen <shenjian15@...wei.com>, Salil Mehta <salil.mehta@...wei.com>, Andrew
 Lunn <andrew+netdev@...n.ch>, "David S . Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
 Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>, Nathan
 Chancellor <nathan@...nel.org>, Nick Desaulniers
 <nick.desaulniers+lkml@...il.com>, Bill Wendling <morbo@...gle.com>, Justin
 Stitt <justinstitt@...gle.com>, Hao Lan <lanhao@...wei.com>, Guangwei Zhang
 <zhangwangwei6@...wei.com>, Netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
 <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <llvm@...ts.linux.dev>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] hns3: work around stack size warning

On Thu, 12 Jun 2025 21:09:40 +0800 Jijie Shao wrote:
> >> Would you please help test whether the following changes have solved
> >> your problem,
> >> And I'm not sure if this patch should be sent to net or net-next...  
> > Your patch arrived with whitespace corruption here, so I could not
> > try it, but I'm sure it would help avoid the warning.
> >
> > However, this is not what meant with my suggestion: you already
> > allocate a temporary buffer in hns3_dbg_open() and I would
> > expect it to be possible to read into that buffer directly
> > without a second temporary buffer (on stack or kmalloc).
> >
> > The normal way of doing this would be to use the infrastructure
> > from seq_file and then seq_printf() and not have any extra buffers
> > on top of that.
> 
> seq_file is good. But the change is quite big.
> I need to discuss it internally, and it may not be completed so quickly.
> I will also need consider the maintainer's suggestion.

Arnd, do you mind waiting? We can apply your patch as is if the warning
is a nuisance.