On 02-05-2018 13:36, Kees Cook wrote: > On Wed, May 2, 2018 at 1:54 AM, Jose Abreu <jose.ab...@synopsys.com> wrote: >> Hi Kees, >> >> On 01-05-2018 22:01, Kees Cook wrote: >>> In the quest to remove all stack VLAs from the kernel[1], this switches >>> the "status" stack buffer to use the existing small (8) upper bound on >>> how many queues can be checked for DMA, and adds a sanity-check just to >>> make sure it doesn't operate under pathological conditions. >>> >>> [1] >>> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__lkml.kernel.org_r_CA-2B55aFzCG-2DzNmZwX4A2FQpadafLfEzK6CC-3DqPXydAacU1RqZWA-40mail.gmail.com&d=DwIBAg&c=DPL6_X_6JkXFx7AXWqB0tg&r=WHDsc6kcWAl4i96Vm5hJ_19IJiuxx_p_Rzo2g-uHDKw&m=TBD6a7UY2VbpPmV9LOW_eHAyg8uPq1ZPDhq93VROTVE&s=4fvOST1HhWmZ4lThQe-dHCJYEXNOwey00BCXOWm8tKo&e= >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Kees Cook <keesc...@chromium.org> >>> >> I rather prefer the variables declaration in reverse-tree order, >> but thats just a minor pick. > I can explicitly reorder the other variables, if you want?
No need by me, unless Giuseppe or Alexandre prefer that. Thanks! Best Regards, Jose Miguel Abreu > >> Reviewed-by: Jose Abreu <joab...@synopsys.com> > Thanks! > >> PS: Is VLA warning switch in gcc already active? Because I didn't >> see this warning in my builds. > It is not. A bunch of people have been building with KCFLAGS=-Wvla to > find the VLAs and sending patches. Once we get rid of them all, we can > add the flag to the top-level Makefile. > > -Kees >
