Messages in this thread | | | From | Kees Cook <> | Date | Wed, 17 Oct 2018 11:23:02 -0700 | Subject | Re: [PATCH] crypto: inside-secure: safexcel - fix memory allocation |
| |
On Wed, Oct 17, 2018 at 7:41 AM, Gustavo A. R. Silva <gustavo@embeddedor.com> wrote: > > > On 10/17/18 9:20 AM, Antoine Tenart wrote: >> Hi, >> >> On Wed, Oct 17, 2018 at 02:17:41PM +0800, Herbert Xu wrote: >>> On Tue, Oct 16, 2018 at 09:44:02PM +0200, Gustavo A. R. Silva wrote: >>>> On 10/9/18 12:20 AM, Kees Cook wrote: >>>>> On Mon, Oct 8, 2018 at 12:17 PM, Gustavo A. R. Silva >>>>> <gustavo@embeddedor.com> wrote: >>>>>> The original intention is to allocate space for EIP197_DEFAULT_RING_SIZE >>>>>> *pointers* to struct, so sizeof(priv->ring[i].rdr_req) should be >>>>>> sizeof(*priv->ring[i].rdr_req). >>>>>> >>>>>> Addresses-Coverity-ID: 1473962 ("Sizeof not portable") >>>>>> Fixes: 9744fec95f06 ("crypto: inside-secure - remove request list to improve performance") >>>>>> Signed-off-by: Gustavo A. R. Silva <gustavo@embeddedor.com> >>>>> >>>>> Reviewed-by: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Friendly ping. Who can take this? >>> >>> Well I tried to take it but it doesn't apply against cryptodev. >>> So I presume this can go into the tree that carried the change >>> which it depended on? >> >> I would say this should go in cryptodev. The issue is probably because >> of other changes that got applied in the meantime. Gustavo can probably >> rebase his patch on top of cryptodev, and re-send it. >> > > cryptodev is missing the previous commit 329e09893909d409039f6a79757d9b80b67efe39 > to which this patch applies. > > Kees, did you apply the commit above to your tree? > > If so, could you take this patch?
Since this has no functional exposure (the sizes are the same), let's just wait until after the merge window to get this into crypto-next.
-Kees
-- Kees Cook Pixel Security
| |