From: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>
To: Miguel Ojeda <miguel.ojeda.sandonis@gmail.com>
Cc: linux-hardening@vger.kernel.org,
"Andy Shevchenko" <andy@kernel.org>,
"Cezary Rojewski" <cezary.rojewski@intel.com>,
"Puyou Lu" <puyou.lu@gmail.com>,
"Mark Brown" <broonie@kernel.org>,
"Josh Poimboeuf" <jpoimboe@kernel.org>,
"Peter Zijlstra" <peterz@infradead.org>,
"Brendan Higgins" <brendan.higgins@linux.dev>,
"David Gow" <davidgow@google.com>,
"Andrew Morton" <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
"Nathan Chancellor" <nathan@kernel.org>,
"Alexander Potapenko" <glider@google.com>,
"Zhaoyang Huang" <zhaoyang.huang@unisoc.com>,
"Randy Dunlap" <rdunlap@infradead.org>,
"Geert Uytterhoeven" <geert+renesas@glider.be>,
"Miguel Ojeda" <ojeda@kernel.org>,
"Nick Desaulniers" <ndesaulniers@google.com>,
"Liam Howlett" <liam.howlett@oracle.com>,
"Vlastimil Babka" <vbabka@suse.cz>,
"Dan Williams" <dan.j.williams@intel.com>,
"Rasmus Villemoes" <linux@rasmusvillemoes.dk>,
"Yury Norov" <yury.norov@gmail.com>,
"Jason A. Donenfeld" <Jason@zx2c4.com>,
"Sander Vanheule" <sander@svanheule.net>,
"Eric Biggers" <ebiggers@google.com>,
"Masami Hiramatsu (Google)" <mhiramat@kernel.org>,
"Andrey Konovalov" <andreyknvl@gmail.com>,
"Linus Walleij" <linus.walleij@linaro.org>,
"Daniel Latypov" <dlatypov@google.com>,
"José Expósito" <jose.exposito89@gmail.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kunit-dev@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 6/9] fortify: Split reporting and avoid passing string pointer
Date: Thu, 6 Apr 2023 15:54:35 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <642f4dab.170a0220.97691.39c9@mx.google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CANiq72=Awa4B1qL+Zdkuj1-EX+Tv=fK=pRM_DMdYCDmByEVOHg@mail.gmail.com>
On Thu, Apr 06, 2023 at 03:44:54PM +0200, Miguel Ojeda wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 6, 2023 at 2:02 AM Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org> wrote:
> >
> > +void __fortify_report(u8 reason);
> > +void __fortify_panic(u8 reason) __cold __noreturn;
>
> (snip)
>
> > +void __fortify_report(u8 reason)
>
> (snip)
>
> > +void __fortify_panic(const u8 reason)
>
> I am curious: for some reason (no pun intended :) the `reason`s above
> are not `const` except this one, but then in a later patch they become
> `const` (including the declarations).
>
> So perhaps make everything `const` when they are introduced? Or is
> there some other reason? (e.g. I saw one patch that moved a function,
> so there it seemed to make sense to keep things as they are to make
> the copy 1:1).
I will adjust it -- this was an artifact of splitting up my patches.
Thanks!
--
Kees Cook
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-04-06 22:54 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 26+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-04-06 0:01 [PATCH 0/9] fortify: Add KUnit tests for runtime overflows Kees Cook
2023-04-06 0:02 ` [PATCH 1/9] kunit: tool: Enable CONFIG_FORTIFY_SOURCE under UML Kees Cook
2023-04-06 3:10 ` Kees Cook
2023-04-06 0:02 ` [PATCH 2/9] fortify: Allow KUnit test to build without FORTIFY Kees Cook
2023-04-06 1:22 ` Daniel Latypov
2023-04-06 23:09 ` Kees Cook
2023-04-06 0:02 ` [PATCH 3/9] string: Add Kunit tests for strcat() family Kees Cook
2023-04-06 9:11 ` Alexander Potapenko
2023-04-06 23:07 ` Kees Cook
2023-04-12 12:34 ` Alexander Potapenko
2023-04-06 0:02 ` [PATCH 4/9] fortify: Add protection for strlcat() Kees Cook
2023-04-06 13:32 ` Miguel Ojeda
2023-04-06 22:58 ` Kees Cook
2023-04-06 0:02 ` [PATCH 5/9] fortify: strcat: Move definition to use fortified strlcat() Kees Cook
2023-04-06 0:02 ` [PATCH 6/9] fortify: Split reporting and avoid passing string pointer Kees Cook
2023-04-06 10:20 ` Andy Shevchenko
2023-04-06 22:57 ` Kees Cook
2023-04-07 8:34 ` Andy Shevchenko
2023-04-07 19:49 ` Kees Cook
2023-04-06 13:44 ` Miguel Ojeda
2023-04-06 22:54 ` Kees Cook [this message]
2023-04-06 15:23 ` Alexander Lobakin
2023-04-06 22:54 ` Kees Cook
2023-04-06 0:02 ` [PATCH 7/9] fortify: Provide KUnit counters for failure testing Kees Cook
2023-04-06 0:02 ` [PATCH 8/9] fortify: Add KUnit tests for runtime overflows Kees Cook
2023-04-06 0:02 ` [PATCH 9/9] fortify: Improve buffer overflow reporting Kees Cook
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=642f4dab.170a0220.97691.39c9@mx.google.com \
--to=keescook@chromium.org \
--cc=Jason@zx2c4.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=andreyknvl@gmail.com \
--cc=andy@kernel.org \
--cc=brendan.higgins@linux.dev \
--cc=broonie@kernel.org \
--cc=cezary.rojewski@intel.com \
--cc=dan.j.williams@intel.com \
--cc=davidgow@google.com \
--cc=dlatypov@google.com \
--cc=ebiggers@google.com \
--cc=geert+renesas@glider.be \
--cc=glider@google.com \
--cc=jose.exposito89@gmail.com \
--cc=jpoimboe@kernel.org \
--cc=kunit-dev@googlegroups.com \
--cc=liam.howlett@oracle.com \
--cc=linus.walleij@linaro.org \
--cc=linux-hardening@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux@rasmusvillemoes.dk \
--cc=mhiramat@kernel.org \
--cc=miguel.ojeda.sandonis@gmail.com \
--cc=nathan@kernel.org \
--cc=ndesaulniers@google.com \
--cc=ojeda@kernel.org \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=puyou.lu@gmail.com \
--cc=rdunlap@infradead.org \
--cc=sander@svanheule.net \
--cc=vbabka@suse.cz \
--cc=yury.norov@gmail.com \
--cc=zhaoyang.huang@unisoc.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
Powered by JetHome