search for: keescook

...9; 24 | int nvif_outp_acquire_dp(struct nvif_outp *, u8 dpcd[16], | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Avoid these warnings by defining the argument size using the matching define (DP_RECEIVER_CAP_SIZE, 15) instead of having it be a literal (and incorrect) value (16). Reported-by: coverity-bot <keescook+coverity-bot at chromium.org> Addresses-Coverity-ID: 1527269 ("Memory - corruptions") Addresses-Coverity-ID: 1527268 ("Memory - corruptions") Link: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/202211100848.FFBA2432 at keescook/ Link: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/202211100848.F4C2819BB at kee...

...gt; > | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > > > > Avoid these warnings by defining the argument size using the matching > > define (DP_RECEIVER_CAP_SIZE, 15) instead of having it be a literal > > (and incorrect) value (16). > > > > Reported-by: coverity-bot <keescook+coverity-bot at chromium.org> > > Addresses-Coverity-ID: 1527269 ("Memory - corruptions") > > Addresses-Coverity-ID: 1527268 ("Memory - corruptions") > > Link: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/202211100848.FFBA2432 at keescook/ > > Link: https://lore.kerne...

Am 22.09.23 um 19:41 schrieb Alex Deucher: > On Fri, Sep 22, 2023 at 1:32?PM Kees Cook <keescook at chromium.org> wrote: >> Prepare for the coming implementation by GCC and Clang of the __counted_by >> attribute. Flexible array members annotated with __counted_by can have >> their accesses bounds-checked at run-time checking via CONFIG_UBSAN_BOUNDS >> (for array inde...

Am 22.09.23 um 19:41 schrieb Alex Deucher: > On Fri, Sep 22, 2023 at 1:32?PM Kees Cook <keescook at chromium.org> wrote: >> Prepare for the coming implementation by GCC and Clang of the __counted_by >> attribute. Flexible array members annotated with __counted_by can have >> their accesses bounds-checked at run-time checking via CONFIG_UBSAN_BOUNDS >> (for array inde...

Am 22.09.23 um 19:41 schrieb Alex Deucher: > On Fri, Sep 22, 2023 at 1:32?PM Kees Cook <keescook at chromium.org> wrote: >> Prepare for the coming implementation by GCC and Clang of the __counted_by >> attribute. Flexible array members annotated with __counted_by can have >> their accesses bounds-checked at run-time checking via CONFIG_UBSAN_BOUNDS >> (for array inde...

On Mon, Sep 25, 2023 at 08:30:30AM +0200, Christian K?nig wrote: > Am 22.09.23 um 19:41 schrieb Alex Deucher: > > On Fri, Sep 22, 2023 at 1:32?PM Kees Cook <keescook at chromium.org> wrote: > > > Prepare for the coming implementation by GCC and Clang of the __counted_by > > > attribute. Flexible array members annotated with __counted_by can have > > > their accesses bounds-checked at run-time checking via CONFIG_UBSAN_BOUNDS > &...

On Mon, Sep 25, 2023 at 08:30:30AM +0200, Christian K?nig wrote: > Am 22.09.23 um 19:41 schrieb Alex Deucher: > > On Fri, Sep 22, 2023 at 1:32?PM Kees Cook <keescook at chromium.org> wrote: > > > Prepare for the coming implementation by GCC and Clang of the __counted_by > > > attribute. Flexible array members annotated with __counted_by can have > > > their accesses bounds-checked at run-time checking via CONFIG_UBSAN_BOUNDS > &...

On Mon, Sep 25, 2023 at 08:30:30AM +0200, Christian K?nig wrote: > Am 22.09.23 um 19:41 schrieb Alex Deucher: > > On Fri, Sep 22, 2023 at 1:32?PM Kees Cook <keescook at chromium.org> wrote: > > > Prepare for the coming implementation by GCC and Clang of the __counted_by > > > attribute. Flexible array members annotated with __counted_by can have > > > their accesses bounds-checked at run-time checking via CONFIG_UBSAN_BOUNDS > &...

Hi, This is a batch of patches touching drm for preparing for the coming implementation by GCC and Clang of the __counted_by attribute. Flexible array members annotated with __counted_by can have their accesses bounds-checked at run-time checking via CONFIG_UBSAN_BOUNDS (for array indexing) and CONFIG_FORTIFY_SOURCE (for strcpy/memcpy-family functions). As found with Coccinelle[1], add

Hi, This is a batch of patches touching drm for preparing for the coming implementation by GCC and Clang of the __counted_by attribute. Flexible array members annotated with __counted_by can have their accesses bounds-checked at run-time checking via CONFIG_UBSAN_BOUNDS (for array indexing) and CONFIG_FORTIFY_SOURCE (for strcpy/memcpy-family functions). As found with Coccinelle[1], add

Hi, This is a batch of patches touching drm for preparing for the coming implementation by GCC and Clang of the __counted_by attribute. Flexible array members annotated with __counted_by can have their accesses bounds-checked at run-time checking via CONFIG_UBSAN_BOUNDS (for array indexing) and CONFIG_FORTIFY_SOURCE (for strcpy/memcpy-family functions). As found with Coccinelle[1], add

On Thu, Apr 26, 2018 at 4:25 PM, Kees Cook <keescook at chromium.org> wrote: > On Thu, Mar 15, 2018 at 7:05 PM, Ben Skeggs <skeggsb at gmail.com> wrote: >> On 14 March 2018 at 21:08, Thierry Reding <thierry.reding at gmail.com> wrote: >>> On Tue, Mar 13, 2018 at 11:24:11AM -0500, Gustavo A. R. Silva wrote: >>&gt...

On Fri, Jun 22, 2018 at 10:50 AM, Karol Herbst <kherbst at redhat.com> wrote: > On Thu, May 24, 2018 at 7:24 PM, Kees Cook <keescook at chromium.org> wrote: >> In the quest to remove all stack VLA usage from the kernel[1], this >> allocates the working buffers before starting the writing so it won't >> abort in the middle. This needs an initial walk of the lists to figure >> out how large the buffe...

On Fri, Sep 22, 2023 at 1:32?PM Kees Cook <keescook at chromium.org> wrote: > > Prepare for the coming implementation by GCC and Clang of the __counted_by > attribute. Flexible array members annotated with __counted_by can have > their accesses bounds-checked at run-time checking via CONFIG_UBSAN_BOUNDS > (for array indexing) and C...

On Fri, Sep 22, 2023 at 1:32?PM Kees Cook <keescook at chromium.org> wrote: > > Prepare for the coming implementation by GCC and Clang of the __counted_by > attribute. Flexible array members annotated with __counted_by can have > their accesses bounds-checked at run-time checking via CONFIG_UBSAN_BOUNDS > (for array indexing) and C...

On Fri, Sep 22, 2023 at 1:32?PM Kees Cook <keescook at chromium.org> wrote: > > Prepare for the coming implementation by GCC and Clang of the __counted_by > attribute. Flexible array members annotated with __counted_by can have > their accesses bounds-checked at run-time checking via CONFIG_UBSAN_BOUNDS > (for array indexing) and C...

...quot;Pan, Xinhui" <Xinhui.Pan at amd.com> Cc: David Airlie <airlied at gmail.com> Cc: Daniel Vetter <daniel at ffwll.ch> Cc: Hawking Zhang <Hawking.Zhang at amd.com> Cc: amd-gfx at lists.freedesktop.org Cc: dri-devel at lists.freedesktop.org Signed-off-by: Kees Cook <keescook at chromium.org> --- drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_discovery.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_discovery.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_discovery.c index d1bc7b212520..be4c97a3d7bf 100644 --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/...

...quot;Pan, Xinhui" <Xinhui.Pan at amd.com> Cc: David Airlie <airlied at gmail.com> Cc: Daniel Vetter <daniel at ffwll.ch> Cc: Hawking Zhang <Hawking.Zhang at amd.com> Cc: amd-gfx at lists.freedesktop.org Cc: dri-devel at lists.freedesktop.org Signed-off-by: Kees Cook <keescook at chromium.org> --- drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_discovery.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_discovery.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_discovery.c index d1bc7b212520..be4c97a3d7bf 100644 --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/...

...quot;Pan, Xinhui" <Xinhui.Pan at amd.com> Cc: David Airlie <airlied at gmail.com> Cc: Daniel Vetter <daniel at ffwll.ch> Cc: Hawking Zhang <Hawking.Zhang at amd.com> Cc: amd-gfx at lists.freedesktop.org Cc: dri-devel at lists.freedesktop.org Signed-off-by: Kees Cook <keescook at chromium.org> --- drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_discovery.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_discovery.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_discovery.c index d1bc7b212520..be4c97a3d7bf 100644 --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/...

On Sun, Nov 22, 2020 at 8:17 AM Kees Cook <keescook at chromium.org> wrote: > > On Fri, Nov 20, 2020 at 11:51:42AM -0800, Jakub Kicinski wrote: > > If none of the 140 patches here fix a real bug, and there is no change > > to machine code then it sounds to me like a W=2 kind of a warning. > > FWIW, this series has found at...