module: Add compile-time check for embedded NUL characters
Status from this message: Applied patch 3, thanks!
Get series with b4
b4 am [email protected]Versions newest first · linked by author and title
- v2 Latest3 patches 34 repliesApplied
- v13 patches 21 repliesSuperseded
Changes in v2 from the cover letter
- use static_assert instead of _Static_assert
- add Hans's Reviewed-by's
v1: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/[email protected]/
Patches in v2 Applied
| # | Subject and files | Size | Replies | Applied |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1/3 | media: dvb-usb-v2: lmedm04: Fix firmware macro definitionsdrivers/ | +6 | 1 reply | |
| 2/3 | media: radio: si470x: Fix DRIVER_AUTHOR macro definitiondrivers/ | +1 | 1 reply | |
| 3/3 | module: Add compile-time check for embedded NUL charactersinclude/ | +3 | 10 replies |
Reviews trailers per patch
All 3 patches have a Reviewed-by or Acked-by of their own; the series has one for all of them.
| Patch | Hans Verkuil | Petr Pavlu | Mauro Carvalho Chehab | Aaron Tomlin | Daniel Gomez |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Series | R-b T-b | ||||
| 1/3 | R-b | R-b | |||
| 2/3 | R-b | R-b | |||
| 3/3 | R-b | R-b | R-b |
Trailers given in replies are filled; those carried in the patches from earlier versions are outlined with dashes. Scroll the table sideways for all 5 reviewers.
Cover letter [PATCH v2 0/3] module: Add compile-time check for embedded NUL characters
v2:
- use static_assert instead of _Static_assert
- add Hans's Reviewed-by's
v1: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/[email protected]/
Hi!
A long time ago we had an issue with embedded NUL bytes in MODULE_INFO strings[1]. While this stands out pretty strongly when you look at the code, and we can't do anything about a binary module that just plain lies, we never actually implemented the trivial compile-time check needed to detect it.
Add this check (and fix 2 instances of needless trailing semicolons that this change exposed).
Note that these patches were produced as part of another LLM exercise. This time I wanted to try "what happens if I ask an LLM to go read a specific LWN article and write a patch based on a discussion?" It pretty effortlessly chose and implemented a suggested solution, tested the change, and fixed new build warnings in the process.
Since this was a relatively short session, here's an overview of the prompts involved as I guided it through a clean change and tried to see how it would reason about static_assert vs _Static_assert. (It wanted to use what was most common, not what was the current style -- we may want to update the comment above the static_assert macro to suggest using _Static_assert directly these days...)
I want to fix a weakness in the module info strings. Read about it
here: https://lwn.net/Articles/82305/
Since it's only "info" that we need to check, can you reduce the checks to just that instead of all the other stuff?
I think the change to the comment is redundent, and that should be in a commit log instead. Let's just keep the change to the static assert.
Is "static_assert" the idiomatic way to use a static assert in this code base? I've seen _Static_assert used sometimes.
What's the difference between the two?
Does Linux use C11 by default now?
Then let's not use the wrapper any more.
Do an "allmodconfig all -s" build to verify this works for all modules in the kernel.
Thanks!
-Kees
[1] https://lwn.net/Articles/82305/
Kees Cook (3):
media: dvb-usb-v2: lmedm04: Fix firmware macro definitions
media: radio: si470x: Fix DRIVER_AUTHOR macro definition
module: Add compile-time check for embedded NUL characters
include/linux/moduleparam.h | 3 +++ drivers/media/radio/si470x/radio-si470x-i2c.c | 2 +- drivers/media/usb/dvb-usb-v2/lmedm04.c | 12 ++++++------ 3 files changed, 10 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
Signature · 1 line
2.34.1