From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from bmailout1.hostsharing.net (bmailout1.hostsharing.net [83.223.95.100]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 11D96296BD6 for ; Sat, 14 Mar 2026 18:37:17 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=83.223.95.100 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1773513441; cv=none; b=MB/Ms9QssD2h9A8hPlwuA8Q6aosqeYl7K/BMv9Ed8Y2beQFkkOgwvDbwSuPbPEr9qObuBLSAJn/FwweyMrRWD8kqiH6lJApjH6j8GZ0If92WCfgIn6jc4JRvVveEpQafH3sJ4akY+Oo9yAyybes327WH33/wz4Q8unU3KVIDerw= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1773513441; c=relaxed/simple; bh=zorgPiFi2fNS/ZFJPNkYvwT/2KEm5Git4UaiyVWOxTs=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=geG/OXsqQv1rfmTkq5l/POc6y8B0iGUjNdsNfzOzZZgIFljfitPicHj8yPn9uoyfi0VbllaMHh+OAZXUtNsuIGdOrOLUgu76VTiiev33SEfZAhP34UxwaML4PcWaKqzi7Sp5HNAAAymocYqUyrMUgeZnKaXudBACAf185QRyLzU= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=wunner.de; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=wunner.de; arc=none smtp.client-ip=83.223.95.100 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=wunner.de Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=wunner.de Received: from h08.hostsharing.net (h08.hostsharing.net [IPv6:2a01:37:1000::53df:5f1c:0]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange x25519 server-signature ECDSA (secp384r1) server-digest SHA384 client-signature ECDSA (secp384r1) client-digest SHA384) (Client CN "*.hostsharing.net", Issuer "GlobalSign GCC R6 AlphaSSL CA 2025" (verified OK)) by bmailout1.hostsharing.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 432CE2020222; Sat, 14 Mar 2026 19:37:10 +0100 (CET) Received: by h08.hostsharing.net (Postfix, from userid 100393) id 23D1F1BCF2; Sat, 14 Mar 2026 19:37:10 +0100 (CET) Date: Sat, 14 Mar 2026 19:37:10 +0100 From: Lukas Wunner To: Dan Williams Cc: linux-coco@lists.linux.dev, linux-pci@vger.kernel.org, gregkh@linuxfoundation.org, aik@amd.com, aneesh.kumar@kernel.org, yilun.xu@linux.intel.com, bhelgaas@google.com, alistair23@gmail.com, jgg@nvidia.com, Donald Hunter , Jakub Kicinski Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 08/19] PCI/TSM: Add "evidence" support Message-ID: References: <20260303000207.1836586-1-dan.j.williams@intel.com> <20260303000207.1836586-9-dan.j.williams@intel.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-coco@lists.linux.dev List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20260303000207.1836586-9-dan.j.williams@intel.com> On Mon, Mar 02, 2026 at 04:01:56PM -0800, Dan Williams wrote: > +definitions: > + - > + type: const > + name: max-object-size > + value: 0x01000000 [...] > + - > + name: val > + type: binary > + checks: > + max-len: max-obj-size The length of a netlink attribute is a 16-bit value, so a 16 MByte value (0x01000000) won't fit. Moreover you're referencing max-obj-size but are defining max-object-size. This doesn't look like it's ever been tested, so at the very least it should be marked RFC in the subject to convey that it's not yet in a cut-and-dried state. The two top-most commits on my development branch have solved the size problem and may serve as a template: https://github.com/l1k/linux/commits/doe Thanks, Lukas