Re: [PATCH 1/2] tty: vcc: zero-initialize control packet in vcc_send_ctl()
From: Greg Kroah-Hartman
Date: Fri Jul 31 2026 - 04:36:38 EST
On Fri, Jul 31, 2026 at 10:29:14AM +0200, Jiri Slaby wrote:
> On 31. 07. 26, 10:15, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> > From: Joshua Rogers <linux@xxxxxxxxx>
> >
> > The stack-allocated struct vio_vcc pkt was partially initialized,
> > leaving the tag.stype_env field uninitialized before being sent via
> > ldc_write(), potentially leaking kernel stack data to the LDC peer.
> >
> > Assisted-by: AISLE:Snapshot
> > Cc: stable <stable@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > Signed-off-by: Joshua Rogers <linux@xxxxxxxxx>
> > Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> > drivers/tty/vcc.c | 2 +-
> > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/tty/vcc.c b/drivers/tty/vcc.c
> > index 27a55465bf5e..3947bd2b75ac 100644
> > --- a/drivers/tty/vcc.c
> > +++ b/drivers/tty/vcc.c
> > @@ -492,7 +492,7 @@ static ssize_t domain_show(struct device *dev,
> > static int vcc_send_ctl(struct vcc_port *port, int ctl)
> > {
> > - struct vio_vcc pkt;
> > + struct vio_vcc pkt = {};
>
> Note this needs not initialize holes.
Does it? I keep forgetting this if it's really true or not. I think
we've been through this in the past but I can't find the archives.
> I believe there are none here, but memset() is usually
> preferred/safer.
Last I remember, a long time ago, the compiler would just use memset()
for this, and hit the holes. Or is that a compiler-specific issue?
Yes, it's more obvious, and I'll be glad to change it, but figuring this
out for real would be great :)
thanks,
greg k-h