Linux Trace Kernel
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* [PATCH] bootconfig: remove unreachable index checks in xbc_verify_tree()
@ 2026-09-05 14:16 Sang-Heon Jeon
  2026-09-08  1:46 ` Masami Hiramatsu
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread
From: Sang-Heon Jeon @ 2026-09-05 14:16 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Andrew Morton, Masami Hiramatsu; +Cc: linux-trace-kernel

xbc_verify_tree() checks that every node's next and child are below
xbc_node_num. Both fields store the index of an existing node, which
is below xbc_node_num.

So remove the checks.

No functional change.

Signed-off-by: Sang-Heon Jeon <ekffu200098@gmail.com>
---
 lib/bootconfig.c | 13 +------------
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 12 deletions(-)

diff --git a/lib/bootconfig.c b/lib/bootconfig.c
index 89c88e359179..d383430637ee 100644
--- a/lib/bootconfig.c
+++ b/lib/bootconfig.c
@@ -1005,7 +1005,7 @@ static int __init xbc_close_brace(char **k, char *n)
 
 static int __init xbc_verify_tree(void)
 {
-	int i, depth;
+	int depth;
 	size_t len, wlen;
 	struct xbc_node *n, *m;
 
@@ -1022,17 +1022,6 @@ static int __init xbc_verify_tree(void)
 		return -ENOENT;
 	}
 
-	for (i = 0; i < xbc_node_num; i++) {
-		if (xbc_nodes[i].next >= xbc_node_num) {
-			return xbc_parse_error("No closing brace",
-				xbc_node_get_data(xbc_nodes + i));
-		}
-		if (xbc_nodes[i].child >= xbc_node_num) {
-			return xbc_parse_error("Broken child node",
-				xbc_node_get_data(xbc_nodes + i));
-		}
-	}
-
 	/* Key tree limitation check */
 	n = &xbc_nodes[0];
 	depth = 1;
-- 
2.43.0


^ permalink raw reply related	[flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread

* Re: [PATCH] bootconfig: remove unreachable index checks in xbc_verify_tree()
  2026-09-05 14:16 [PATCH] bootconfig: remove unreachable index checks in xbc_verify_tree() Sang-Heon Jeon
@ 2026-09-08  1:46 ` Masami Hiramatsu
  2026-09-08 15:34   ` Sang-Heon Jeon
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread
From: Masami Hiramatsu @ 2026-09-08  1:46 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Sang-Heon Jeon; +Cc: Andrew Morton, linux-trace-kernel

On Sat,  5 Sep 2026 23:16:36 +0900
Sang-Heon Jeon <ekffu200098@gmail.com> wrote:

> xbc_verify_tree() checks that every node's next and child are below
> xbc_node_num. Both fields store the index of an existing node, which
> is below xbc_node_num.

This is a kind of foolpoof/defensive checking. (so I call it verify.)

> 
> So remove the checks.
> 
> No functional change.

Hmm, OK, I think we should decouple the logic/implementation
verification from runtime verification (e.g. wrong format)
and move the former to tools/bootconfig.

Thank you,

> 
> Signed-off-by: Sang-Heon Jeon <ekffu200098@gmail.com>
> ---
>  lib/bootconfig.c | 13 +------------
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 12 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/lib/bootconfig.c b/lib/bootconfig.c
> index 89c88e359179..d383430637ee 100644
> --- a/lib/bootconfig.c
> +++ b/lib/bootconfig.c
> @@ -1005,7 +1005,7 @@ static int __init xbc_close_brace(char **k, char *n)
>  
>  static int __init xbc_verify_tree(void)
>  {
> -	int i, depth;
> +	int depth;
>  	size_t len, wlen;
>  	struct xbc_node *n, *m;
>  
> @@ -1022,17 +1022,6 @@ static int __init xbc_verify_tree(void)
>  		return -ENOENT;
>  	}
>  
> -	for (i = 0; i < xbc_node_num; i++) {
> -		if (xbc_nodes[i].next >= xbc_node_num) {
> -			return xbc_parse_error("No closing brace",
> -				xbc_node_get_data(xbc_nodes + i));
> -		}
> -		if (xbc_nodes[i].child >= xbc_node_num) {
> -			return xbc_parse_error("Broken child node",
> -				xbc_node_get_data(xbc_nodes + i));
> -		}
> -	}
> -
>  	/* Key tree limitation check */
>  	n = &xbc_nodes[0];
>  	depth = 1;
> -- 
> 2.43.0
> 


-- 
Masami Hiramatsu (Google) <mhiramat@kernel.org>

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread

* Re: [PATCH] bootconfig: remove unreachable index checks in xbc_verify_tree()
  2026-09-08  1:46 ` Masami Hiramatsu
@ 2026-09-08 15:34   ` Sang-Heon Jeon
  2026-09-08 23:24     ` Masami Hiramatsu
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread
From: Sang-Heon Jeon @ 2026-09-08 15:34 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Masami Hiramatsu; +Cc: Andrew Morton, linux-trace-kernel

Hi,

On Tue, Sep 8, 2026 at 10:46 AM Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@kernel.org> wrote:
>
> On Sat,  5 Sep 2026 23:16:36 +0900
> Sang-Heon Jeon <ekffu200098@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > xbc_verify_tree() checks that every node's next and child are below
> > xbc_node_num. Both fields store the index of an existing node, which
> > is below xbc_node_num.
>
> This is a kind of foolpoof/defensive checking. (so I call it verify.)
>
> >
> > So remove the checks.
> >
> > No functional change.
>
> Hmm, OK, I think we should decouple the logic/implementation
> verification from runtime verification (e.g. wrong format)
> and move the former to tools/bootconfig.
>
> Thank you,

Thanks for the review, Masami.

To make sure I understand, you mean moving the foolproof check after
xbc_init() in tools/bootconfig?

> >
> > Signed-off-by: Sang-Heon Jeon <ekffu200098@gmail.com>
> > ---
> >  lib/bootconfig.c | 13 +------------
> >  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 12 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/lib/bootconfig.c b/lib/bootconfig.c
> > index 89c88e359179..d383430637ee 100644
> > --- a/lib/bootconfig.c
> > +++ b/lib/bootconfig.c
> > @@ -1005,7 +1005,7 @@ static int __init xbc_close_brace(char **k, char *n)
> >
> >  static int __init xbc_verify_tree(void)
> >  {
> > -     int i, depth;
> > +     int depth;
> >       size_t len, wlen;
> >       struct xbc_node *n, *m;
> >
> > @@ -1022,17 +1022,6 @@ static int __init xbc_verify_tree(void)
> >               return -ENOENT;
> >       }
> >
> > -     for (i = 0; i < xbc_node_num; i++) {
> > -             if (xbc_nodes[i].next >= xbc_node_num) {
> > -                     return xbc_parse_error("No closing brace",
> > -                             xbc_node_get_data(xbc_nodes + i));
> > -             }
> > -             if (xbc_nodes[i].child >= xbc_node_num) {
> > -                     return xbc_parse_error("Broken child node",
> > -                             xbc_node_get_data(xbc_nodes + i));
> > -             }
> > -     }
> > -
> >       /* Key tree limitation check */
> >       n = &xbc_nodes[0];
> >       depth = 1;
> > --
> > 2.43.0
> >
>
>
> --
> Masami Hiramatsu (Google) <mhiramat@kernel.org>

Best regards,
Sang-Heon Jeon

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread

* Re: [PATCH] bootconfig: remove unreachable index checks in xbc_verify_tree()
  2026-09-08 15:34   ` Sang-Heon Jeon
@ 2026-09-08 23:24     ` Masami Hiramatsu
  2026-09-09  1:27       ` Sang-Heon Jeon
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread
From: Masami Hiramatsu @ 2026-09-08 23:24 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Sang-Heon Jeon; +Cc: Andrew Morton, linux-trace-kernel

On Wed, 9 Sep 2026 00:34:35 +0900
Sang-Heon Jeon <ekffu200098@gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi,
> 
> On Tue, Sep 8, 2026 at 10:46 AM Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@kernel.org> wrote:
> >
> > On Sat,  5 Sep 2026 23:16:36 +0900
> > Sang-Heon Jeon <ekffu200098@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > xbc_verify_tree() checks that every node's next and child are below
> > > xbc_node_num. Both fields store the index of an existing node, which
> > > is below xbc_node_num.
> >
> > This is a kind of foolpoof/defensive checking. (so I call it verify.)
> >
> > >
> > > So remove the checks.
> > >
> > > No functional change.
> >
> > Hmm, OK, I think we should decouple the logic/implementation
> > verification from runtime verification (e.g. wrong format)
> > and move the former to tools/bootconfig.
> >
> > Thank you,
> 
> Thanks for the review, Masami.
> 
> To make sure I understand, you mean moving the foolproof check after
> xbc_init() in tools/bootconfig?

Instead of just removing this, move this verification into tools/bootconfig.
(we still need verification of user given broken bootconfig.)
Let me handle it.

Thank you,

> 
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Sang-Heon Jeon <ekffu200098@gmail.com>
> > > ---
> > >  lib/bootconfig.c | 13 +------------
> > >  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 12 deletions(-)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/lib/bootconfig.c b/lib/bootconfig.c
> > > index 89c88e359179..d383430637ee 100644
> > > --- a/lib/bootconfig.c
> > > +++ b/lib/bootconfig.c
> > > @@ -1005,7 +1005,7 @@ static int __init xbc_close_brace(char **k, char *n)
> > >
> > >  static int __init xbc_verify_tree(void)
> > >  {
> > > -     int i, depth;
> > > +     int depth;
> > >       size_t len, wlen;
> > >       struct xbc_node *n, *m;
> > >
> > > @@ -1022,17 +1022,6 @@ static int __init xbc_verify_tree(void)
> > >               return -ENOENT;
> > >       }
> > >
> > > -     for (i = 0; i < xbc_node_num; i++) {
> > > -             if (xbc_nodes[i].next >= xbc_node_num) {
> > > -                     return xbc_parse_error("No closing brace",
> > > -                             xbc_node_get_data(xbc_nodes + i));
> > > -             }
> > > -             if (xbc_nodes[i].child >= xbc_node_num) {
> > > -                     return xbc_parse_error("Broken child node",
> > > -                             xbc_node_get_data(xbc_nodes + i));
> > > -             }
> > > -     }
> > > -
> > >       /* Key tree limitation check */
> > >       n = &xbc_nodes[0];
> > >       depth = 1;
> > > --
> > > 2.43.0
> > >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Masami Hiramatsu (Google) <mhiramat@kernel.org>
> 
> Best regards,
> Sang-Heon Jeon


-- 
Masami Hiramatsu (Google) <mhiramat@kernel.org>

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread

* Re: [PATCH] bootconfig: remove unreachable index checks in xbc_verify_tree()
  2026-09-08 23:24     ` Masami Hiramatsu
@ 2026-09-09  1:27       ` Sang-Heon Jeon
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 5+ messages in thread
From: Sang-Heon Jeon @ 2026-09-09  1:27 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Masami Hiramatsu; +Cc: Andrew Morton, linux-trace-kernel

On Wed, Sep 9, 2026 at 8:25 AM Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@kernel.org> wrote:
>
> On Wed, 9 Sep 2026 00:34:35 +0900
> Sang-Heon Jeon <ekffu200098@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > On Tue, Sep 8, 2026 at 10:46 AM Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@kernel.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Sat,  5 Sep 2026 23:16:36 +0900
> > > Sang-Heon Jeon <ekffu200098@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > xbc_verify_tree() checks that every node's next and child are below
> > > > xbc_node_num. Both fields store the index of an existing node, which
> > > > is below xbc_node_num.
> > >
> > > This is a kind of foolpoof/defensive checking. (so I call it verify.)
> > >
> > > >
> > > > So remove the checks.
> > > >
> > > > No functional change.
> > >
> > > Hmm, OK, I think we should decouple the logic/implementation
> > > verification from runtime verification (e.g. wrong format)
> > > and move the former to tools/bootconfig.
> > >
> > > Thank you,
> >
> > Thanks for the review, Masami.
> >
> > To make sure I understand, you mean moving the foolproof check after
> > xbc_init() in tools/bootconfig?
>
> Instead of just removing this, move this verification into tools/bootconfig.
> (we still need verification of user given broken bootconfig.)
> Let me handle it.

Thank you for clarifying. I'm looking forward to it!

> Thank you,
>
> >
> > > >
> > > > Signed-off-by: Sang-Heon Jeon <ekffu200098@gmail.com>
> > > > ---
> > > >  lib/bootconfig.c | 13 +------------
> > > >  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 12 deletions(-)
> > > >
> > > > diff --git a/lib/bootconfig.c b/lib/bootconfig.c
> > > > index 89c88e359179..d383430637ee 100644
> > > > --- a/lib/bootconfig.c
> > > > +++ b/lib/bootconfig.c
> > > > @@ -1005,7 +1005,7 @@ static int __init xbc_close_brace(char **k, char *n)
> > > >
> > > >  static int __init xbc_verify_tree(void)
> > > >  {
> > > > -     int i, depth;
> > > > +     int depth;
> > > >       size_t len, wlen;
> > > >       struct xbc_node *n, *m;
> > > >
> > > > @@ -1022,17 +1022,6 @@ static int __init xbc_verify_tree(void)
> > > >               return -ENOENT;
> > > >       }
> > > >
> > > > -     for (i = 0; i < xbc_node_num; i++) {
> > > > -             if (xbc_nodes[i].next >= xbc_node_num) {
> > > > -                     return xbc_parse_error("No closing brace",
> > > > -                             xbc_node_get_data(xbc_nodes + i));
> > > > -             }
> > > > -             if (xbc_nodes[i].child >= xbc_node_num) {
> > > > -                     return xbc_parse_error("Broken child node",
> > > > -                             xbc_node_get_data(xbc_nodes + i));
> > > > -             }
> > > > -     }
> > > > -
> > > >       /* Key tree limitation check */
> > > >       n = &xbc_nodes[0];
> > > >       depth = 1;
> > > > --
> > > > 2.43.0
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Masami Hiramatsu (Google) <mhiramat@kernel.org>
> >
> > Best regards,
> > Sang-Heon Jeon
>
>
> --
> Masami Hiramatsu (Google) <mhiramat@kernel.org>

Best regards,
Sang-Heon Jeon

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread

end of thread, other threads:[~2026-09-09  1:28 UTC | newest]

Thread overview: 5+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2026-09-05 14:16 [PATCH] bootconfig: remove unreachable index checks in xbc_verify_tree() Sang-Heon Jeon
2026-09-08  1:46 ` Masami Hiramatsu
2026-09-08 15:34   ` Sang-Heon Jeon
2026-09-08 23:24     ` Masami Hiramatsu
2026-09-09  1:27       ` Sang-Heon Jeon

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox