Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Date:   Sun, 3 Jul 2022 15:22:18 +0100
From:   Aaron Tomlin <atomlin@redhat.com>
To:     Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@csgroup.eu>
Cc:     "mcgrof@kernel.org" <mcgrof@kernel.org>,
        "linux-modules@vger.kernel.org" <linux-modules@vger.kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] module: Show the last unloaded module's taint flag(s)
Message-ID: <20220703142218.65dacvxozppgct6y@ava.usersys.com>
References: <20220627164052.2416485-1-atomlin@redhat.com>
 <20220627164052.2416485-2-atomlin@redhat.com>
 <4ddb64da-58f0-a4af-cf57-a870015a0077@csgroup.eu>
 <20220628074708.fg3ocx3vu7affkxl@ava.usersys.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20220628074708.fg3ocx3vu7affkxl@ava.usersys.com>
Precedence: bulk

On Tue 2022-06-28 08:47 +0100, Aaron Tomlin wrote:
> On Tue 2022-06-28 05:54 +0000, Christophe Leroy wrote:
> > > -	/* Store the name of the last unloaded module for diagnostic purposes */
> > >   	strlcpy(last_unloaded_module, mod->name, sizeof(last_unloaded_module));
> > > +	strcat(last_unloaded_module, module_flags(mod, buf, false));
> > 
> > You replace a bounded string copy by an unbounded strict contat.
> > 
> > Should you use strlcat() instead ?
> 
> Hi Christophe,
> 
> Why? If I understand correctly, both the destination and source string are
> NULL-terminated (see module_flags()). So, strcat() should be sufficient.

Hi Luis,

Any thoughts on this? As far as I can tell, the destination string cannot
be overwritten; albeit, I can use the safer option if you prefer.


Kind regards,

-- 
Aaron Tomlin