[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Tue, 13 Mar 2018 13:06:33 -0700
From: Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>
To: Vivien Didelot <vivien.didelot@...oirfairelinux.com>,
Salvatore Mesoraca <s.mesoraca16@...il.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc: kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>,
Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] net: dsa: drop some VLAs in switch.c
On 03/13/2018 12:58 PM, Vivien Didelot wrote:
> Hi Salvatore,
>
> Salvatore Mesoraca <s.mesoraca16@...il.com> writes:
>
>> dsa_switch's num_ports is currently fixed to DSA_MAX_PORTS. So we avoid
>> 2 VLAs[1] by using DSA_MAX_PORTS instead of ds->num_ports.
>>
>> [1] https://lkml.org/lkml/2018/3/7/621
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Salvatore Mesoraca <s.mesoraca16@...il.com>
>
> NAK.
>
> We are in the process to remove hardcoded limits such as DSA_MAX_PORTS
> and DSA_MAX_SWITCHES, so we have to stick with ds->num_ports.
Then this means that we need to allocate a bitmap from the heap, which
sounds a bit superfluous and could theoretically fail... not sure which
way is better, but bumping the size to DSA_MAX_PORTS definitively does
help people working on enabling -Wvla.
--
Florian
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use?
Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia
and check out these
guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.
