Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v2 5/5] xen/keyhandler: Drop keyhandler_scratch

["Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@xxxxxxxx>]

>>> On 30.10.18 at 16:46, <wei.liu2@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 30, 2018 at 09:40:17AM -0600, Jan Beulich wrote:
>> >>> On 30.10.18 at 16:32, <wei.liu2@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> > On Fri, Oct 26, 2018 at 09:21:03AM -0600, Jan Beulich wrote:
>> >> >>> On 22.10.18 at 14:58, <andrew.cooper3@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> >> > --- a/xen/common/efi/boot.c
>> >> > +++ b/xen/common/efi/boot.c
>> >> > @@ -487,6 +487,7 @@ static EFI_FILE_HANDLE __init 
> get_parent_handle(EFI_LOADED_IMAGE *loaded_image,
>> >> >                                                  CHAR16 **leaf)
>> >> >  {
>> >> >      static EFI_GUID __initdata fs_protocol = 
>> >> > SIMPLE_FILE_SYSTEM_PROTOCOL;
>> >> > +    static CHAR16 __initdata buffer[256];
>> >> 
>> >> Did you intentionally halve the size of the buffer?
>> > 
>> > 
>> > Seeing the length field consists of two uint8, the maximum length of the
>> > path is 256.
>> 
>> With
>> 
>> #define DevicePathNodeLength(a)     ( ((a)->Length[0]) | ((a)->Length[1] << 
>> 8) )
>> 
>> I'd rather say 65536.
> 
> Yes you're right. Can't do calculation when I'm having a cold. :-(
> But having 65536 is unrealistic.

Sure, I certainly don't mean the buffer to grow that large, but I'd
prefer if it didn't shrink compared to the original.

Jan



_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel