Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::3:1 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::3:1;
Date:   Sun, 8 Oct 2023 14:02:28 -0700
From:   Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>
To:     Hans Verkuil <hverkuil-cisco@xs4all.nl>
Cc:     Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@kernel.org>,
        lijian <lijian@yulong.com>, linux-media@vger.kernel.org,
        Nathan Chancellor <nathan@kernel.org>,
        Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@google.com>,
        Tom Rix <trix@redhat.com>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        llvm@lists.linux.dev, linux-hardening@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] media: v4l2-event: Annotate struct v4l2_subscribed_event
 with __counted_by
Message-ID: <202310081402.F4DBC2B@keescook>
References: <20230922174951.work.160-kees@kernel.org>
 <169662411867.2154917.2192633783167073007.b4-ty@chromium.org>
 <eeeb183e-f6ed-4158-8852-04da5e452d9b@xs4all.nl>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <eeeb183e-f6ed-4158-8852-04da5e452d9b@xs4all.nl>
Precedence: bulk

On Sat, Oct 07, 2023 at 11:21:26AM +0200, Hans Verkuil wrote:
> On 06/10/2023 22:28, Kees Cook wrote:
> > On Fri, 22 Sep 2023 10:49:52 -0700, Kees Cook wrote:
> >> Prepare for the coming implementation by GCC and Clang of the __counted_by
> >> attribute. Flexible array members annotated with __counted_by can have
> >> their accesses bounds-checked at run-time checking via CONFIG_UBSAN_BOUNDS
> >> (for array indexing) and CONFIG_FORTIFY_SOURCE (for strcpy/memcpy-family
> >> functions).
> >>
> >> As found with Coccinelle[1], add __counted_by for struct v4l2_subscribed_event.
> >> Additionally, since the element count member must be set before accessing
> >> the annotated flexible array member, move its initialization earlier.
> >>
> >> [...]
> > 
> > Since this is a trivial change and it's been 2 week without further
> > discussion, I'll snag this patch.
> 
> Ah, I picked this up for media as well. Same for the other patch.
> You should have gotten an email from patchwork on Oct 3 that it was accepted.
> 
> I think I should be more pro-active and reply when I pick up patches from
> non-media developers instead of relying on patchwork. It seems that it is
> easy to miss emails from patchwork.

Ah! Thanks for reminding me. I'll drop them from the hardening tree. :)

-Kees

-- 
Kees Cook