Re: [PATCH] bcache: safeguard a dangerous addressing in closure_queue

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On 10/12/2017 07:37 AM, Liang Chen wrote:
> The use of the union reduces the size of closure struct by taking advantage
> of the current size of its members. The offset of func in work_struct equals
> the size of the first three members, so that work.work_func will just
> reference the forth member - fn.
> 
> This is smart but dangerous. It can be broken if work_struct or the other
> structs get changed, and can be a bit difficult to debug.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Liang Chen <liangchen.linux@xxxxxxxxx>

So the objective here is to make sure that struct work_struct and the
anonymous struct remain identical?  I agree that's a potential problem
for future maintenance.

Could we use BUILD_BUG_ON with offsets and sizes to do the same, to get
compile-time checking and avoid doing anything at runtime (I know the
compiler can usually omit the BUG but better to be safe)?  Otherwise a
kernel that triggered this problem would compile, and it'd only be if
someone actually used bcache that it would trigger.

Mike
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-bcache" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html



[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Index of Archives]     [Linux ARM Kernel]     [Linux Filesystem Development]     [Linux ARM]     [Linux Omap]     [Fedora ARM]     [IETF Annouce]     [Security]     [Bugtraq]     [Linux OMAP]     [Linux MIPS]     [ECOS]     [Asterisk Internet PBX]     [Linux API]

  Powered by Linux