Kalle Valo <kvalo@xxxxxxxxxx> writes: > Kees Cook <keescook@xxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > >> In preparation for FORTIFY_SOURCE performing compile-time and run-time >> field bounds checking for memset(), avoid intentionally writing across >> neighboring fields. >> >> Use memset_startat() so memset() doesn't get confused about writing >> beyond the destination member that is intended to be the starting point >> of zeroing through the end of the struct. Additionally split up a later >> field-spanning memset() so that memset() can reason about the size. >> >> Cc: Kalle Valo <kvalo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> >> Cc: "David S. Miller" <davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> >> Cc: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@xxxxxxxxxx> >> Cc: ath11k@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >> Cc: linux-wireless@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >> Cc: netdev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >> Signed-off-by: Kees Cook <keescook@xxxxxxxxxxxx> > > What's the plan for this patch? I would like to take this via my ath > tree to avoid conflicts. Actually this has been already applied: https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/kvalo/ath.git/commit/?h=ath-next&id=d5549e9a6b86 Why are you submitting the same patch twice? -- https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-wireless/list/ https://wireless.wiki.kernel.org/en/developers/documentation/submittingpatches
