From owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG  Fri Sep 17 01:37:36 2004
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 495EB16A4CE
	for <freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org>;
	Fri, 17 Sep 2004 01:37:36 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from vsmtp3.tin.it (vsmtp3alice.tin.it [212.216.176.143])
	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BE93A43D67
	for <freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org>;
	Fri, 17 Sep 2004 01:37:35 +0000 (GMT)	(envelope-from gerarra@tin.it)
Received: from ims3a.cp.tin.it (192.168.70.103) by vsmtp3.tin.it (7.0.027)
	id 41499D520003A142 for freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org;
	Fri, 17 Sep 2004 03:37:36 +0200
Received: from [192.168.70.181] by ims3a.cp.tin.it with HTTP;
	Fri, 17 Sep 2004 03:37:35 +0200
Date: Fri, 17 Sep 2004 03:37:35 +0200
Message-ID: <4146316C00007833@ims3a.cp.tin.it>
From: gerarra@tin.it
To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-15"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Subject: Re: FreeBSD Kernel buffer overflow
X-BeenThere: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1
Precedence: list
List-Id: Technical Discussions relating to FreeBSD
	<freebsd-hackers.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers>,
	<mailto:freebsd-hackers-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-hackers>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-hackers-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers>,
	<mailto:freebsd-hackers-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 17 Sep 2004 01:37:36 -0000


>
>If we put your patch in but as a KASSERT then anyone ruinning with 
>debugging turned on
>(and no-one in their right mind would write a kernel module without 
>turning on debugging, right?)
>will immediatly find the problem.
>

What you can't understand is that having a limit about arguments is wrong=

(it's not documented too). Why limiting to 8 and not to 20? or 65? i don'=
t
understand...
In my opinion a patch would be better (and even quicker respect KASSERT).=


rookie