Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
From:   John Ogness <john.ogness@linutronix.de>
To:     Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com>
Cc:     Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com>,
        Petr Mladek <pmladek@suse.com>,
        Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky.work@gmail.com>,
        Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] printk: fix buffer overflow potential for print_text()
In-Reply-To: <YAa0j9CG/6yrGcs+@jagdpanzerIV.localdomain>
References: <20210114170412.4819-1-john.ogness@linutronix.de> <YAGE1O/nG57hyRs4@alley> <YAGFebfPNLwjyhcl@alley> <YAYriDiAl7lajty9@jagdpanzerIV.localdomain> <87r1mh5mso.fsf@jogness.linutronix.de> <YAa0j9CG/6yrGcs+@jagdpanzerIV.localdomain>
Date:   Tue, 19 Jan 2021 12:50:47 +0106
Message-ID: <87bldl5exc.fsf@jogness.linutronix.de>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Precedence: bulk

On 2021-01-19, Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> John, how did you spot these problems?
>> 
>> I am preparing my series to remove the logbuf_lock, which also
>> refactors and consolidates code from syslog_print_all() and
>> kmsg_dump_get_buffer(). While testing/verifying my series, I noticed
>> the these oddities in the semantics and decided I should research
>> where they came from and if they were actually necessary.
>
> Any chance you can put those tests somewhere public so that we can
> run them regularly?

I have a collection of hacked-together tools that I use to test most of
the various interfaces of printk. I would need to clean them up if they
should be used for any kind of automated regression testing.

And where should I make such things available? I could put them in a
repo in the Linutronix github account (like I did for the ringbuffer
stress testing tool). (??)

John