Re: [GIT PULL] overflow updates (part 2) for v4.18-rc1
- Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2018 18:44:37 -0700
- From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] overflow updates (part 2) for v4.18-rc1
On Tue, Jun 12, 2018 at 4:36 PM Kees Cook <keescook@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> - Treewide conversions of allocators to use either 2-factor argument
> variant when available, or array_size() and array3_size() as needed (Kees)
Ok, some of this smells just a tad too much of automation, but I've
done the pull and it's going through my build tests.
Example nonsensical conversion:
- res = kzalloc(sizeof(struct resource) * 2, GFP_KERNEL);
+ res = kcalloc(2, sizeof(struct resource), GFP_KERNEL);
which isn't _wrong_, but...
In some of the cases it turns a compile-time constant into a function
call, ie this just makes for bigger and slower code for no reason
- ch->tx_array = vzalloc(MIC_DMA_DESC_RX_SIZE * sizeof(*ch->tx_array));
+ ch->tx_array = vzalloc(array_size(MIC_DMA_DESC_RX_SIZE,
At least in the kzalloc/kcalloc conversion it results in more legible code.
The array_size() conversions, in contrast, actually result in *LESS*
legible code, in worse code generation, and absolutely no upside for
cases like the above.
To make up for it, there's some conversions *away* from nonsensical expressions:
- hc_name = kzalloc(sizeof(char) * (HSMMC_NAME_LEN + 1), GFP_KERNEL);
+ hc_name = kzalloc(HSMMC_NAME_LEN + 1, GFP_KERNEL);
but I _really_ think you were way too eager to move to array_size()
even when it made no sense what-so-ever.
But at least with the kcalloc()/kmalloc_array() conversions now
preferred, those crazy cases are now a minority rather than "most of
the patch makes code worse".
I am *not* looking forward to the conflicts this causes, but maybe it
won't be too bad. Fingers crossed.