From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail-m6015.netease.com (mail-m6015.netease.com [210.79.60.15]) (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 D8D6F524AC for ; Mon, 25 Dec 2023 13:52:48 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=easystack.cn Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=easystack.cn Received: from [10.9.0.134] (unknown [211.103.144.18]) by smtp.qiye.163.com (Hmail) with ESMTPA id EB78C4C0290; Mon, 25 Dec 2023 21:44:02 +0800 (CST) Message-ID: Date: Mon, 25 Dec 2023 21:44:02 +0800 Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] x86/kexec: fix potential cmem->ranges out of bounds Content-Language: en-US To: Baoquan He Cc: Vivek Goyal , Dave Young , kexec@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org References: <20231222121855.148215-1-fuqiang.wang@easystack.cn> From: fuqiang wang In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-HM-Spam-Status: e1kfGhgUHx5ZQUpXWQgPGg8OCBgUHx5ZQUlOS1dZFg8aDwILHllBWSg2Ly tZV1koWUFJQjdXWS1ZQUlXWQ8JGhUIEh9ZQVkaGEpMVk5KTxlLTExNGR5KGFUZERMWGhIXJBQOD1 lXWRgSC1lBWUlKSlVKS0hVSk9PVUpDWVdZFhoPEhUdFFlBWU9LSFVKTU9JTE5VSktLVUpCS0tZBg ++ X-HM-Tid: 0a8ca137e1fd022ekunmeb78c4c0290 X-HM-MType: 1 X-HM-Sender-Digest: e1kMHhlZQR0aFwgeV1kSHx4VD1lBWUc6MRQ6Nzo5STc#Fy4DGT0SIzgR Gh0aCxBVSlVKTEtITkpKQ09ITE1PVTMWGhIXVR0OChIaFRxVDBoVHDseGggCCA8aGBBVGBVFWVdZ EgtZQVlJSkpVSktIVUpPT1VKQ1lXWQgBWUFJS0xCNwY+ 在 2023/12/24 12:46, Baoquan He 写道: > Rethink about this, seems above code comment is fine to be kept, and the > same feeling about the elfheader region split from crashk_res. So, other > than the patch log concerns, this patch looks good to me. Let's see if > other people has concern about the newly added comments. > Hi Baoquan Thank you very much for your suggestions in the patch log and code comments. I have learned a lot and I will gradually improve. I found the following patch in linux-next: https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/next/linux-next.git/commit/?id=666ef13f2870c43ba8a402ec8a3cedf6eb6c6f5a I'm sorry, It's my mistake. Do you think it is still necessary to merge this patch based on that ? Thanks a lot again fuqiang