Thread (36 messages) 36 messages, 6 authors, 38m ago

Re: [PATCH v4 08/11] seq_buf: Add seq_buf_init_append()

From: bot+bpf-ci@kernel.org
Date: 2026-10-03 04:34:01
Also in: bpf, linux-doc, linux-hardening, linuxppc-dev, lkml, nvdimm

seq_buf: Add seq_buf_init_append()
TL;DR: Commit message only: it says seq_buf_init() sets the buffer size to 0
via seq_buf_clear(), but it resets the length, not the size. The code is not
reported as buggy.
seq_buf: Add seq_buf_init_append()

Several strlcat() call sites being converted to seq_buf need behavior
seq_buf doesn't currently provide. The normal seq_buf_init() always
sets the new buffer size to 0 via seq_buf_clear(). Code migrating from
strlcat(buf, ...), which appends to whatever buf already contains,
can't use seq_buf_init() without discarding that existing content. Add
seq_buf_init_append(), which preserves the existing contents and positions
the seq_buf to append after it. A buffer with no NUL within its size
starts out overflowed, as strlcat() treats it as already truncated.
Add KUnit tests for behavior coverage.

Tests passed under qemu on ARCH=x86_64 with GCC 16.2.0 and CONFIG_KASAN=y,
and on big-endian ARCH=s390 with GCC s390x-linux-gnu 16.2.0.

Assisted-by: LLM
Signed-off-by: Bill Wendling <morbo@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>
Co-developed-by: Kees Cook <kees@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Kees Cook <kees@kernel.org>
This isn't a bug in the code, but is the changelog accurate when it says
seq_buf_init() "always sets the new buffer size to 0 via seq_buf_clear()"?

seq_buf_init() stores the size it was given in s->size, and seq_buf_clear()
leaves s->size alone.  It only resets the length and terminates the first
byte:

    static inline void seq_buf_clear(struct seq_buf *s)
    {
    	s->len = 0;
    	if (s->size)
    		s->buffer[0] = '\0';
    }

Should the sentence say that seq_buf_init() always sets the length (s->len)
to 0 via seq_buf_clear(), rather than the buffer size?


---
AI reviewed your patch. Please fix the bug or email reply why it's not a bug.
See: https://github.com/kernel-patches/vmtest/blob/master/ci/claude/README.md

CI run summary: https://github.com/kernel-patches/bpf/actions/runs/37096036516
Keyboard shortcuts
hback out one level
jnext message in thread
kprevious message in thread
ldrill in
Escclose help / fold thread tree
?toggle this help