From: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Erick Archer <erick.archer@outlook.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@kernel.org>,
Namhyung Kim <namhyung@kernel.org>,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@linux.intel.com>,
Jiri Olsa <jolsa@kernel.org>, Ian Rogers <irogers@google.com>,
Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@intel.com>,
"Liang, Kan" <kan.liang@linux.intel.com>,
"Gustavo A. R. Silva" <gustavoars@kernel.org>,
Justin Stitt <justinstitt@google.com>,
linux-perf-users@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-hardening@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] perf/ring_buffer: Prefer struct_size over open coded arithmetic
Date: Wed, 1 May 2024 13:21:42 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <202405011317.AF41B94B@keescook> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20240430091504.GC40213@noisy.programming.kicks-ass.net>
On Tue, Apr 30, 2024 at 11:15:04AM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 29, 2024 at 07:40:58PM +0200, Erick Archer wrote:
> > This is an effort to get rid of all multiplications from allocation
> > functions in order to prevent integer overflows [1][2].
>
> So personally I detest struct_size() because I can never remember wtf it
> does, whereas the code it replaces is simple and straight forward :/
Sure, new APIs can involved a learning curve. If we can all handle
container_of(), we can deal with struct_size(). :)
--
Kees Cook
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-05-01 20:21 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-04-29 17:40 [PATCH] perf/ring_buffer: Prefer struct_size over open coded arithmetic Erick Archer
2024-04-29 18:23 ` Kees Cook
2024-04-30 9:15 ` Peter Zijlstra
2024-05-01 17:23 ` Erick Archer
2024-05-01 20:21 ` Kees Cook [this message]
2024-05-02 9:18 ` Peter Zijlstra
2024-05-02 22:55 ` Kees Cook
2024-05-04 17:21 ` Erick Archer
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=202405011317.AF41B94B@keescook \
--to=keescook@chromium.org \
--cc=acme@kernel.org \
--cc=adrian.hunter@intel.com \
--cc=alexander.shishkin@linux.intel.com \
--cc=erick.archer@outlook.com \
--cc=gustavoars@kernel.org \
--cc=irogers@google.com \
--cc=jolsa@kernel.org \
--cc=justinstitt@google.com \
--cc=kan.liang@linux.intel.com \
--cc=linux-hardening@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-perf-users@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mark.rutland@arm.com \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=namhyung@kernel.org \
--cc=peterz@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.