From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Coly Li Subject: Re: [PATCH] bcache: Use scnprintf() for avoiding potential buffer overflow Date: Fri, 20 Mar 2020 00:32:33 +0800 Message-ID: <343532cd-1354-913b-e0d0-8e323147c1a4@suse.de> References: <20200311074558.8517-1-tiwai@suse.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Return-path: Received: from mx2.suse.de ([195.135.220.15]:51938 "EHLO mx2.suse.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1727222AbgCSQcj (ORCPT ); Thu, 19 Mar 2020 12:32:39 -0400 In-Reply-To: Content-Language: en-US Sender: linux-bcache-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-bcache@vger.kernel.org To: Takashi Iwai Cc: Kent Overstreet , linux-bcache@vger.kernel.org On 2020/3/20 12:28 上午, Takashi Iwai wrote: > On Thu, 19 Mar 2020 17:27:47 +0100, > Coly Li wrote: >> >> On 2020/3/19 11:58 下午, Takashi Iwai wrote: >>> On Wed, 11 Mar 2020 08:45:58 +0100, >>> Takashi Iwai wrote: >>>> >>>> Since snprintf() returns the would-be-output size instead of the >>>> actual output size, the succeeding calls may go beyond the given >>>> buffer limit. Fix it by replacing with scnprintf(). >>>> >>>> Signed-off-by: Takashi Iwai >>> >>> A gentle reminder for this forgotten patch. >>> Let me know if any further changes are needed. >>> >> >> Hi Takashi, >> >> This is in my for-next list already. Sorry for not reply you yet, just >> busy on the testing with combined with md raid backend. > > OK, thanks. I just wondered because it didn't appear on linux-next, > either. I don't submit the patch set to Jens yet, because my local testing not finished yet. Hopefully it may finish in next 2 days. -- Coly Li