Re: [PATCH] crypto: inside-secure: safexcel - fix memory allocation

2018-10-17 Thread Gustavo A. R. Silva
On 10/17/18 8:23 PM, Kees Cook wrote: >> >> If so, could you take this patch? > > Since this has no functional exposure (the sizes are the same), let's > just wait until after the merge window to get this into crypto-next. > Okay. I agree. Thanks! -- Gustavo

Re: [PATCH] crypto: inside-secure: safexcel - fix memory allocation

2018-10-17 Thread Kees Cook
On Wed, Oct 17, 2018 at 7:41 AM, Gustavo A. R. Silva wrote: > > > On 10/17/18 9:20 AM, Antoine Tenart wrote: >> Hi, >> >> On Wed, Oct 17, 2018 at 02:17:41PM +0800, Herbert Xu wrote: >>> On Tue, Oct 16, 2018 at 09:44:02PM +0200, Gustavo A. R. Silva wrote: On 10/9/18 12:20 AM, Kees Cook wrote:

Re: [PATCH] crypto: inside-secure: safexcel - fix memory allocation

2018-10-17 Thread Gustavo A. R. Silva
On 10/17/18 9:20 AM, Antoine Tenart wrote: > Hi, > > On Wed, Oct 17, 2018 at 02:17:41PM +0800, Herbert Xu wrote: >> On Tue, Oct 16, 2018 at 09:44:02PM +0200, Gustavo A. R. Silva wrote: >>> On 10/9/18 12:20 AM, Kees Cook wrote: On Mon, Oct 8, 2018 at 12:17 PM, Gustavo A. R. Silva wrot

Re: [PATCH] crypto: inside-secure: safexcel - fix memory allocation

2018-10-17 Thread Antoine Tenart
Hi, On Wed, Oct 17, 2018 at 02:17:41PM +0800, Herbert Xu wrote: > On Tue, Oct 16, 2018 at 09:44:02PM +0200, Gustavo A. R. Silva wrote: > > On 10/9/18 12:20 AM, Kees Cook wrote: > > > On Mon, Oct 8, 2018 at 12:17 PM, Gustavo A. R. Silva > > > wrote: > > >> The original intention is to allocate spa

Re: [PATCH] crypto: inside-secure: safexcel - fix memory allocation

2018-10-16 Thread Herbert Xu
On Tue, Oct 16, 2018 at 09:44:02PM +0200, Gustavo A. R. Silva wrote: > Hi all, > > On 10/9/18 12:20 AM, Kees Cook wrote: > > On Mon, Oct 8, 2018 at 12:17 PM, Gustavo A. R. Silva > > wrote: > >> The original intention is to allocate space for EIP197_DEFAULT_RING_SIZE > >> *pointers* to struct, so

Re: [PATCH] crypto: inside-secure: safexcel - fix memory allocation

2018-10-16 Thread Gustavo A. R. Silva
Hi all, On 10/9/18 12:20 AM, Kees Cook wrote: > On Mon, Oct 8, 2018 at 12:17 PM, Gustavo A. R. Silva > wrote: >> The original intention is to allocate space for EIP197_DEFAULT_RING_SIZE >> *pointers* to struct, so sizeof(priv->ring[i].rdr_req) should be >> sizeof(*priv->ring[i].rdr_req). >> >> Ad

Re: [PATCH] crypto: inside-secure: safexcel - fix memory allocation

2018-10-10 Thread Antoine Tenart
Hi Gustavo, On Mon, Oct 08, 2018 at 09:17:12PM +0200, Gustavo A. R. Silva wrote: > The original intention is to allocate space for EIP197_DEFAULT_RING_SIZE > *pointers* to struct, so sizeof(priv->ring[i].rdr_req) should be > sizeof(*priv->ring[i].rdr_req). > > Addresses-Coverity-ID: 1473962 ("Siz

Re: [PATCH] crypto: inside-secure: safexcel - fix memory allocation

2018-10-08 Thread Kees Cook
On Mon, Oct 8, 2018 at 12:17 PM, Gustavo A. R. Silva wrote: > The original intention is to allocate space for EIP197_DEFAULT_RING_SIZE > *pointers* to struct, so sizeof(priv->ring[i].rdr_req) should be > sizeof(*priv->ring[i].rdr_req). > > Addresses-Coverity-ID: 1473962 ("Sizeof not portable") > F

[PATCH] crypto: inside-secure: safexcel - fix memory allocation

2018-10-08 Thread Gustavo A. R. Silva
The original intention is to allocate space for EIP197_DEFAULT_RING_SIZE *pointers* to struct, so sizeof(priv->ring[i].rdr_req) should be sizeof(*priv->ring[i].rdr_req). Addresses-Coverity-ID: 1473962 ("Sizeof not portable") Fixes: 9744fec95f06 ("crypto: inside-secure - remove request list to impr