* [PATCH] kasan: update function name in comments
@ 2022-02-19 1:24 Peter Collingbourne
2022-02-19 2:00 ` Miaohe Lin
2022-02-22 16:38 ` Andrey Konovalov
0 siblings, 2 replies; 7+ messages in thread
From: Peter Collingbourne @ 2022-02-19 1:24 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Andrey Konovalov, Marco Elver
Cc: Peter Collingbourne, Andrew Morton, linux-mm
The function kasan_global_oob was renamed to kasan_global_oob_right,
but the comments referring to it were not updated. Do so.
Link: https://linux-review.googlesource.com/id/I20faa90126937bbee77d9d44709556c3dd4b40be
Signed-off-by: Peter Collingbourne <pcc@google.com>
Fixes: e5f4728767d2 ("kasan: test: add globals left-out-of-bounds test")
---
lib/test_kasan.c | 6 +++---
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/lib/test_kasan.c b/lib/test_kasan.c
index 26a5c9007653..a8dfda9b9630 100644
--- a/lib/test_kasan.c
+++ b/lib/test_kasan.c
@@ -780,7 +780,7 @@ static void ksize_uaf(struct kunit *test)
static void kasan_stack_oob(struct kunit *test)
{
char stack_array[10];
- /* See comment in kasan_global_oob. */
+ /* See comment in kasan_global_oob_right. */
char *volatile array = stack_array;
char *p = &array[ARRAY_SIZE(stack_array) + OOB_TAG_OFF];
@@ -793,7 +793,7 @@ static void kasan_alloca_oob_left(struct kunit *test)
{
volatile int i = 10;
char alloca_array[i];
- /* See comment in kasan_global_oob. */
+ /* See comment in kasan_global_oob_right. */
char *volatile array = alloca_array;
char *p = array - 1;
@@ -808,7 +808,7 @@ static void kasan_alloca_oob_right(struct kunit *test)
{
volatile int i = 10;
char alloca_array[i];
- /* See comment in kasan_global_oob. */
+ /* See comment in kasan_global_oob_right. */
char *volatile array = alloca_array;
char *p = array + i;
--
2.35.1.473.g83b2b277ed-goog
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] kasan: update function name in comments
2022-02-19 1:24 [PATCH] kasan: update function name in comments Peter Collingbourne
@ 2022-02-19 2:00 ` Miaohe Lin
2022-02-21 11:15 ` Marco Elver
2022-02-22 16:38 ` Andrey Konovalov
1 sibling, 1 reply; 7+ messages in thread
From: Miaohe Lin @ 2022-02-19 2:00 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Peter Collingbourne
Cc: Andrew Morton, linux-mm, Andrey Konovalov, Marco Elver
On 2022/2/19 9:24, Peter Collingbourne wrote:
> The function kasan_global_oob was renamed to kasan_global_oob_right,
> but the comments referring to it were not updated. Do so.
>
> Link: https://linux-review.googlesource.com/id/I20faa90126937bbee77d9d44709556c3dd4b40be
> Signed-off-by: Peter Collingbourne <pcc@google.com>
> Fixes: e5f4728767d2 ("kasan: test: add globals left-out-of-bounds test")
This Fixes tag is unneeded.
Except the above nit, this patch looks good to me. Thanks.
Reviewed-by: Miaohe Lin <linmiaohe@huawei.com>
> ---
> lib/test_kasan.c | 6 +++---
> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/lib/test_kasan.c b/lib/test_kasan.c
> index 26a5c9007653..a8dfda9b9630 100644
> --- a/lib/test_kasan.c
> +++ b/lib/test_kasan.c
> @@ -780,7 +780,7 @@ static void ksize_uaf(struct kunit *test)
> static void kasan_stack_oob(struct kunit *test)
> {
> char stack_array[10];
> - /* See comment in kasan_global_oob. */
> + /* See comment in kasan_global_oob_right. */
> char *volatile array = stack_array;
> char *p = &array[ARRAY_SIZE(stack_array) + OOB_TAG_OFF];
>
> @@ -793,7 +793,7 @@ static void kasan_alloca_oob_left(struct kunit *test)
> {
> volatile int i = 10;
> char alloca_array[i];
> - /* See comment in kasan_global_oob. */
> + /* See comment in kasan_global_oob_right. */
> char *volatile array = alloca_array;
> char *p = array - 1;
>
> @@ -808,7 +808,7 @@ static void kasan_alloca_oob_right(struct kunit *test)
> {
> volatile int i = 10;
> char alloca_array[i];
> - /* See comment in kasan_global_oob. */
> + /* See comment in kasan_global_oob_right. */
> char *volatile array = alloca_array;
> char *p = array + i;
>
>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] kasan: update function name in comments
2022-02-19 2:00 ` Miaohe Lin
@ 2022-02-21 11:15 ` Marco Elver
2022-02-23 22:30 ` Peter Collingbourne
0 siblings, 1 reply; 7+ messages in thread
From: Marco Elver @ 2022-02-21 11:15 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Miaohe Lin
Cc: Peter Collingbourne, Andrew Morton, linux-mm, Andrey Konovalov,
kasan-dev, LKML
On Sat, 19 Feb 2022 at 03:00, Miaohe Lin <linmiaohe@huawei.com> wrote:
>
> On 2022/2/19 9:24, Peter Collingbourne wrote:
> > The function kasan_global_oob was renamed to kasan_global_oob_right,
> > but the comments referring to it were not updated. Do so.
> >
> > Link: https://linux-review.googlesource.com/id/I20faa90126937bbee77d9d44709556c3dd4b40be
> > Signed-off-by: Peter Collingbourne <pcc@google.com>
> > Fixes: e5f4728767d2 ("kasan: test: add globals left-out-of-bounds test")
>
> This Fixes tag is unneeded.
>
> Except the above nit, this patch looks good to me. Thanks.
>
> Reviewed-by: Miaohe Lin <linmiaohe@huawei.com>
Reviewed-by: Marco Elver <elver@google.com>
And yes, the Fixes tag should be removed to not have stable teams do
unnecessary work.
+Cc'ing missing mailing lists (use get_maintainers.pl - in particular,
LKML is missing, which should always be Cc'd for archival purposes so
that things like b4 can work properly).
> > ---
> > lib/test_kasan.c | 6 +++---
> > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/lib/test_kasan.c b/lib/test_kasan.c
> > index 26a5c9007653..a8dfda9b9630 100644
> > --- a/lib/test_kasan.c
> > +++ b/lib/test_kasan.c
> > @@ -780,7 +780,7 @@ static void ksize_uaf(struct kunit *test)
> > static void kasan_stack_oob(struct kunit *test)
> > {
> > char stack_array[10];
> > - /* See comment in kasan_global_oob. */
> > + /* See comment in kasan_global_oob_right. */
> > char *volatile array = stack_array;
> > char *p = &array[ARRAY_SIZE(stack_array) + OOB_TAG_OFF];
> >
> > @@ -793,7 +793,7 @@ static void kasan_alloca_oob_left(struct kunit *test)
> > {
> > volatile int i = 10;
> > char alloca_array[i];
> > - /* See comment in kasan_global_oob. */
> > + /* See comment in kasan_global_oob_right. */
> > char *volatile array = alloca_array;
> > char *p = array - 1;
> >
> > @@ -808,7 +808,7 @@ static void kasan_alloca_oob_right(struct kunit *test)
> > {
> > volatile int i = 10;
> > char alloca_array[i];
> > - /* See comment in kasan_global_oob. */
> > + /* See comment in kasan_global_oob_right. */
> > char *volatile array = alloca_array;
> > char *p = array + i;
> >
> >
>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] kasan: update function name in comments
2022-02-19 1:24 [PATCH] kasan: update function name in comments Peter Collingbourne
2022-02-19 2:00 ` Miaohe Lin
@ 2022-02-22 16:38 ` Andrey Konovalov
1 sibling, 0 replies; 7+ messages in thread
From: Andrey Konovalov @ 2022-02-22 16:38 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Peter Collingbourne
Cc: Marco Elver, Andrew Morton, Linux Memory Management List
On Sat, Feb 19, 2022 at 2:24 AM Peter Collingbourne <pcc@google.com> wrote:
>
> The function kasan_global_oob was renamed to kasan_global_oob_right,
> but the comments referring to it were not updated. Do so.
>
> Link: https://linux-review.googlesource.com/id/I20faa90126937bbee77d9d44709556c3dd4b40be
> Signed-off-by: Peter Collingbourne <pcc@google.com>
> Fixes: e5f4728767d2 ("kasan: test: add globals left-out-of-bounds test")
> ---
> lib/test_kasan.c | 6 +++---
> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/lib/test_kasan.c b/lib/test_kasan.c
> index 26a5c9007653..a8dfda9b9630 100644
> --- a/lib/test_kasan.c
> +++ b/lib/test_kasan.c
> @@ -780,7 +780,7 @@ static void ksize_uaf(struct kunit *test)
> static void kasan_stack_oob(struct kunit *test)
> {
> char stack_array[10];
> - /* See comment in kasan_global_oob. */
> + /* See comment in kasan_global_oob_right. */
> char *volatile array = stack_array;
> char *p = &array[ARRAY_SIZE(stack_array) + OOB_TAG_OFF];
>
> @@ -793,7 +793,7 @@ static void kasan_alloca_oob_left(struct kunit *test)
> {
> volatile int i = 10;
> char alloca_array[i];
> - /* See comment in kasan_global_oob. */
> + /* See comment in kasan_global_oob_right. */
> char *volatile array = alloca_array;
> char *p = array - 1;
>
> @@ -808,7 +808,7 @@ static void kasan_alloca_oob_right(struct kunit *test)
> {
> volatile int i = 10;
> char alloca_array[i];
> - /* See comment in kasan_global_oob. */
> + /* See comment in kasan_global_oob_right. */
> char *volatile array = alloca_array;
> char *p = array + i;
>
> --
> 2.35.1.473.g83b2b277ed-goog
>
Reviewed-by: Andrey Konovalov <andreyknvl@gmail.com>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] kasan: update function name in comments
2022-02-21 11:15 ` Marco Elver
@ 2022-02-23 22:30 ` Peter Collingbourne
2022-02-23 23:35 ` Marco Elver
0 siblings, 1 reply; 7+ messages in thread
From: Peter Collingbourne @ 2022-02-23 22:30 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Marco Elver
Cc: Miaohe Lin, Andrew Morton, Linux Memory Management List,
Andrey Konovalov, kasan-dev, LKML
On Mon, Feb 21, 2022 at 3:15 AM Marco Elver <elver@google.com> wrote:
>
> On Sat, 19 Feb 2022 at 03:00, Miaohe Lin <linmiaohe@huawei.com> wrote:
> >
> > On 2022/2/19 9:24, Peter Collingbourne wrote:
> > > The function kasan_global_oob was renamed to kasan_global_oob_right,
> > > but the comments referring to it were not updated. Do so.
> > >
> > > Link: https://linux-review.googlesource.com/id/I20faa90126937bbee77d9d44709556c3dd4b40be
> > > Signed-off-by: Peter Collingbourne <pcc@google.com>
> > > Fixes: e5f4728767d2 ("kasan: test: add globals left-out-of-bounds test")
> >
> > This Fixes tag is unneeded.
> >
> > Except the above nit, this patch looks good to me. Thanks.
> >
> > Reviewed-by: Miaohe Lin <linmiaohe@huawei.com>
>
> Reviewed-by: Marco Elver <elver@google.com>
>
> And yes, the Fixes tag should be removed to not have stable teams do
> unnecessary work.
I thought that Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org controlled whether the patch
is to be taken to the stable kernel and Fixes: was more of an
informational tag. At least that's what this seems to say:
https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/process/submitting-patches.html#reviewer-s-statement-of-oversight
> +Cc'ing missing mailing lists (use get_maintainers.pl - in particular,
> LKML is missing, which should always be Cc'd for archival purposes so
> that things like b4 can work properly).
get_maintainers.pl tends to list a lot of reviewers so I try to filter
it to only the most important recipients or only use it for
"important" patches (like the uaccess logging patch). It's also a bit
broken in my workflow --
https://lore.kernel.org/all/20210913233435.24585-1-pcc@google.com/
fixes one of the problems but there are others.
Doesn't b4 scan all the mailing lists? So I'd have imagined it
wouldn't matter which one you send it to.
Peter
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] kasan: update function name in comments
2022-02-23 22:30 ` Peter Collingbourne
@ 2022-02-23 23:35 ` Marco Elver
2022-02-24 4:07 ` Andrew Morton
0 siblings, 1 reply; 7+ messages in thread
From: Marco Elver @ 2022-02-23 23:35 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Peter Collingbourne
Cc: Miaohe Lin, Andrew Morton, Linux Memory Management List,
Andrey Konovalov, kasan-dev, LKML, Sasha Levin
On Wed, 23 Feb 2022 at 23:31, Peter Collingbourne <pcc@google.com> wrote:
[...]
> > > > Link: https://linux-review.googlesource.com/id/I20faa90126937bbee77d9d44709556c3dd4b40be
> > > > Signed-off-by: Peter Collingbourne <pcc@google.com>
> > > > Fixes: e5f4728767d2 ("kasan: test: add globals left-out-of-bounds test")
> > >
> > > This Fixes tag is unneeded.
> > >
> > > Except the above nit, this patch looks good to me. Thanks.
> > >
> > > Reviewed-by: Miaohe Lin <linmiaohe@huawei.com>
> >
> > Reviewed-by: Marco Elver <elver@google.com>
> >
> > And yes, the Fixes tag should be removed to not have stable teams do
> > unnecessary work.
>
> I thought that Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org controlled whether the patch
> is to be taken to the stable kernel and Fixes: was more of an
> informational tag. At least that's what this seems to say:
> https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/process/submitting-patches.html#reviewer-s-statement-of-oversight
These days patches that just have a Fixes tag (and no Cc: stable) will
be auto-picked in many (most?) cases (by empirical observation).
I think there were also tree-specific variances of this policy, but am
not sure anymore. What is the latest policy?
> > +Cc'ing missing mailing lists (use get_maintainers.pl - in particular,
> > LKML is missing, which should always be Cc'd for archival purposes so
> > that things like b4 can work properly).
>
> get_maintainers.pl tends to list a lot of reviewers so I try to filter
> it to only the most important recipients or only use it for
> "important" patches (like the uaccess logging patch). It's also a bit
> broken in my workflow --
> https://lore.kernel.org/all/20210913233435.24585-1-pcc@google.com/
> fixes one of the problems but there are others.
That's fair. It just seemed that something went wrong given
kasan-dev@googlegroups.com wasn't Cc'd. FWIW, syzbot uses
'get_maintainer.pl --git-min-percent=20' which is a bit less
aggressive with Cc'ing folks not mentioned explicitly in MAINTAINERS.
> Doesn't b4 scan all the mailing lists? So I'd have imagined it
> wouldn't matter which one you send it to.
Those under lore.kernel.org or lists.linux.dev. Seems linux-mm does
get redirected to lore: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-mm/ -- It's not
entirely obvious which are lore managed and which aren't (obviously
things like kasan-dev@googlegroups.com aren't).
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] kasan: update function name in comments
2022-02-23 23:35 ` Marco Elver
@ 2022-02-24 4:07 ` Andrew Morton
0 siblings, 0 replies; 7+ messages in thread
From: Andrew Morton @ 2022-02-24 4:07 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Marco Elver
Cc: Peter Collingbourne, Miaohe Lin, Linux Memory Management List,
Andrey Konovalov, kasan-dev, LKML, Sasha Levin
On Thu, 24 Feb 2022 00:35:32 +0100 Marco Elver <elver@google.com> wrote:
> > I thought that Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org controlled whether the patch
> > is to be taken to the stable kernel and Fixes: was more of an
> > informational tag. At least that's what this seems to say:
> > https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/process/submitting-patches.html#reviewer-s-statement-of-oversight
>
> These days patches that just have a Fixes tag (and no Cc: stable) will
> be auto-picked in many (most?) cases (by empirical observation).
>
> I think there were also tree-specific variances of this policy, but am
> not sure anymore. What is the latest policy?
The -stable maintainers have been asked not to do that for MM patches -
to only take those which the developers (usually I) have explicitly tagged
for backporting.
I don't know how rigorously this is being followed. Probably OK for
patches to mm/* but if it's drivers/base/node.c then heaven knows.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2022-02-24 4:07 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2022-02-19 1:24 [PATCH] kasan: update function name in comments Peter Collingbourne
2022-02-19 2:00 ` Miaohe Lin
2022-02-21 11:15 ` Marco Elver
2022-02-23 22:30 ` Peter Collingbourne
2022-02-23 23:35 ` Marco Elver
2022-02-24 4:07 ` Andrew Morton
2022-02-22 16:38 ` Andrey Konovalov
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.