From: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@oracle.com>
To: Artem Bityutskiy <dedekind1@gmail.com>
Cc: kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org, linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org,
Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [patch] UBIFS: use kmalloc_array() in recomp_data_node()
Date: Thu, 22 Nov 2012 11:14:11 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20121122111411.GJ6186@mwanda> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1353580297.2701.29.camel@sauron.fi.intel.com>
On Thu, Nov 22, 2012 at 12:31:37PM +0200, Artem Bityutskiy wrote:
> On Sat, 2012-11-17 at 18:11 +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> > out_len = le32_to_cpu(dn->size);
> > - buf = kmalloc(out_len * WORST_COMPR_FACTOR, GFP_NOFS);
> > + buf = kmalloc_array(out_len, WORST_COMPR_FACTOR, GFP_NOFS);
> > if (!buf)
> > return -ENOMEM;
>
> I think this makes the code unreadable, because we really allocate a
> buffer, not an array.
The problem with the original code is that the multiply looks very
suspect. Everyone who reads it has to backtrack to find where
dn->size is capped.
I guess in one sense we never allocate an array, we always declare
it on the stack. We debated the naming and there really isn't a
good name. kmalloc_safe() isn't right either. But anyway, the
intent is that eventually someone will right a coccinelle script
which replaces all these allocations with kmalloc_array().
When I look at this code more, I still don't see a place where
dn->size is capped. So I think we *need* the integer overflow
check as an integer overflow fix and not just as a cleanup.
regards,
dan carpenter
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@oracle.com>
To: Artem Bityutskiy <dedekind1@gmail.com>
Cc: kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org, linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org,
Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [patch] UBIFS: use kmalloc_array() in recomp_data_node()
Date: Thu, 22 Nov 2012 14:14:11 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20121122111411.GJ6186@mwanda> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1353580297.2701.29.camel@sauron.fi.intel.com>
On Thu, Nov 22, 2012 at 12:31:37PM +0200, Artem Bityutskiy wrote:
> On Sat, 2012-11-17 at 18:11 +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> > out_len = le32_to_cpu(dn->size);
> > - buf = kmalloc(out_len * WORST_COMPR_FACTOR, GFP_NOFS);
> > + buf = kmalloc_array(out_len, WORST_COMPR_FACTOR, GFP_NOFS);
> > if (!buf)
> > return -ENOMEM;
>
> I think this makes the code unreadable, because we really allocate a
> buffer, not an array.
The problem with the original code is that the multiply looks very
suspect. Everyone who reads it has to backtrack to find where
dn->size is capped.
I guess in one sense we never allocate an array, we always declare
it on the stack. We debated the naming and there really isn't a
good name. kmalloc_safe() isn't right either. But anyway, the
intent is that eventually someone will right a coccinelle script
which replaces all these allocations with kmalloc_array().
When I look at this code more, I still don't see a place where
dn->size is capped. So I think we *need* the integer overflow
check as an integer overflow fix and not just as a cleanup.
regards,
dan carpenter
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-11-22 11:14 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-11-17 15:11 [patch] UBIFS: use kmalloc_array() in recomp_data_node() Dan Carpenter
2012-11-17 15:11 ` Dan Carpenter
2012-11-22 10:31 ` Artem Bityutskiy
2012-11-22 10:31 ` Artem Bityutskiy
2012-11-22 11:14 ` Dan Carpenter [this message]
2012-11-22 11:14 ` Dan Carpenter
2012-11-22 11:24 ` Artem Bityutskiy
2012-11-22 11:24 ` Artem Bityutskiy
2012-11-22 12:33 ` Dan Carpenter
2012-11-22 12:33 ` Dan Carpenter
2012-11-22 14:48 ` Artem Bityutskiy
2012-11-22 14:48 ` Artem Bityutskiy
2012-11-22 16:41 ` Dan Carpenter
2012-11-22 16:41 ` Dan Carpenter
2012-11-22 11:26 ` Artem Bityutskiy
2012-11-22 11:26 ` Artem Bityutskiy
2012-11-22 11:29 ` Artem Bityutskiy
2012-11-22 11:29 ` Artem Bityutskiy
2012-11-22 12:09 ` Dan Carpenter
2012-11-22 12:09 ` Dan Carpenter
2012-11-22 11:50 ` Dan Carpenter
2012-11-22 11:50 ` Dan Carpenter
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20121122111411.GJ6186@mwanda \
--to=dan.carpenter@oracle.com \
--cc=adrian.hunter@intel.com \
--cc=dedekind1@gmail.com \
--cc=kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.