Kees Cook <keescook@xxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > On Tue, Dec 14, 2021 at 05:46:31PM +0200, Kalle Valo wrote: >> 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? > > These are all part of a topic branch, and the cover letter mentioned > that a set of them have already been taken but haven't appeared in -next > (which was delayed). Do note that some wireless drivers (at least ath, mt76 and iwlwifi) are maintained in separate trees, so don't be surprised if it takes several weeks before they are visible in linux-next. -- https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-wireless/list/ https://wireless.wiki.kernel.org/en/developers/documentation/submittingpatches
