From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754562AbeEWIqh (ORCPT ); Wed, 23 May 2018 04:46:37 -0400 Received: from mail-wm0-f68.google.com ([74.125.82.68]:38592 "EHLO mail-wm0-f68.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754513AbeEWIqR (ORCPT ); Wed, 23 May 2018 04:46:17 -0400 X-Google-Smtp-Source: AB8JxZrwLWIsDE0+LaRGfHBaT95h4KNj1bfokb69aWC15sbTAGEeOm8s62xD8W9X0oXtMOoJKxAY5w== Date: Wed, 23 May 2018 10:46:14 +0200 From: Daniel Vetter To: Russell King - ARM Linux Cc: Kees Cook , Daniel Vetter , Laura Abbott , David Airlie , Maling list - DRI developers , LKML , Kernel Hardening Subject: Re: [PATCHv2] drm/i2c: tda998x: Remove VLA usage Message-ID: <20180523084614.GL3438@phenom.ffwll.local> Mail-Followup-To: Russell King - ARM Linux , Kees Cook , Laura Abbott , David Airlie , Maling list - DRI developers , LKML , Kernel Hardening References: <20180411010330.17866-1-labbott@redhat.com> <20180519100707.GI17671@n2100.armlinux.org.uk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20180519100707.GI17671@n2100.armlinux.org.uk> X-Operating-System: Linux phenom 4.15.0-3-amd64 User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.5 (2018-04-13) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Sat, May 19, 2018 at 11:07:08AM +0100, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: > On Fri, May 18, 2018 at 11:01:55AM -0700, Kees Cook wrote: > > On Tue, Apr 10, 2018 at 6:03 PM, Laura Abbott wrote: > > > There's an ongoing effort to remove VLAs[1] from the kernel to eventually > > > turn on -Wvla. The vla in reg_write_range is based on the length of data > > > passed. The one use of a non-constant size for this range is bounded by > > > the size buffer passed to hdmi_infoframe_pack which is a fixed size. > > > Switch to this upper bound. > > > > > > [1] https://lkml.org/lkml/2018/3/7/621 > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Laura Abbott > > > > Reviewed-by: Kees Cook > > > > Same question for this patch: who's best to take this? > > I had decided that I'm not taking any tda998x stuff until we get the > CEC support merged upstream, as that has been hanging around for ages. > Progress has been slow on that, but it finally got to the point where > everyone was happy with it, and I sent a pull request to David Airlie > on April 24th for it. > > Unfortunately, that pull request has not been actioned to date. I've > sent a chaser, and last night, I checked with David Airlie on IRC. > It seems David is not aware of my pull request. David says he'll look > into this on Monday. > > Until David does take it, I can't add anything further to my git tree > for tda998x development, as that would change what was sent to David > back in April. > > The alternative would be for drm-misc to take it - I don't think it > will conflict with anything I've already asked David to take, so that > should be a safe route for _this_ patch. Sounds reasonable, applied to drm-misc-next for 4.19 just to make sure it won't get lost. Thanks, Daniel -- Daniel Vetter Software Engineer, Intel Corporation http://blog.ffwll.ch