From: Javier Carrasco <javier.carrasco.cruz@gmail.com>
To: Lee Jones <lee@kernel.org>
Cc: Tony Lindgren <tony@atomide.com>, Kees Cook <kees@kernel.org>,
"Gustavo A. R. Silva" <gustavoars@kernel.org>,
linux-omap@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-hardening@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] mfd: omap-usb-tll: use struct_size to allocate tll
Date: Wed, 26 Jun 2024 19:26:42 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <5bfebb11-eee1-4c1e-bb2a-7c3b27d2af7b@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20240626152603.GB2504017@google.com>
On 26/06/2024 17:26, Lee Jones wrote:
> On Thu, 20 Jun 2024, Javier Carrasco wrote:
>
>> Use the struct_size macro to calculate the size of the tll, which
>> includes a trailing flexible array.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Javier Carrasco <javier.carrasco.cruz@gmail.com>
>>
>> ---
>> The memory allocation used to be carried out in two steps:
>>
>> tll = devm_kzalloc(dev, sizeof(struct usbtll_omap), GFP_KERNEL);
>> tll->ch_clk = devm_kzalloc(dev, sizeof(struct clk *) * tll->nch,
>> GFP_KERNEL);
>>
>> Until commit 16c2004d9e4d ("mfd: omap-usb-tll: Allocate driver data at once")
>> turned that into the current allocation:
>>
>> tll = devm_kzalloc(dev, sizeof(*tll) + sizeof(tll->ch_clk[nch]),
>> GFP_KERNEL);
>>
>> That has surprised me at first glance because I would have expected
>> sizeof(tll->ch_clk[nch]) to return the size of a single pointer, not
>> being equivalent to 'sizeof(struct clk *) * nch'.
>>
>> I might be missing/misunderstanding something here because the commit
>> is not new, and the error should be noticeable. Moreover, I don't have
>> real hardware to test it. Hence why I didn't mark this patch as a fix.
>>
>> I would be pleased to get feedback about this (why it is right as it is,
>> or if that is actually a bug).
>
> You don't need this H/W to test this our for yourself.
>
> Mock-up the structs in a user-space C-program and print out the sizes.
>
> Please report them all to justify the patch.
>
Values obviously depend on the architecture, but in general:
1.- Before commit 16c2004d9e4d:
1.1. tll = devm_kzalloc(dev, sizeof(struct usbtll_omap), GFP_KERNEL);
-> sizeof(struct usbtll_omap) = N
1.2 tll->ch_clk = devm_kzalloc(dev, sizeof(struct clk *) * tll->nch,
GFP_KERNEL);
-> sizeof(struct clk *) * tll->nch = M * nch
Total = N + M * nch,
where M is the size of a single pointer.
2.- After commit 16c2004d9e4d:
tll = devm_kzalloc(dev, sizeof(*tll) + sizeof(tll->ch_clk[nch]),
GFP_KERNEL);
-> sizeof(*tll) = N
-> sizeof(tll->ch_clk[nch]) = sizeof(struct clk *) = M
Total = N + M
Therefore, it only allocates memory for a single pointer.
3.- struct_size (this patch):
sizeof(*tll) + nch * sizeof(struct clk *) = N + nch * M
What I meant with not having real hardware is that I could not replicate
the whole code with all their structures to get exact sizes, which don't
leave room for discussion or misunderstandings.
Best regards,
Javier Carrasco
>> ---
>> drivers/mfd/omap-usb-tll.c | 3 +--
>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/mfd/omap-usb-tll.c b/drivers/mfd/omap-usb-tll.c
>> index a091e5b0f21d..5f25ac514ff2 100644
>> --- a/drivers/mfd/omap-usb-tll.c
>> +++ b/drivers/mfd/omap-usb-tll.c
>> @@ -230,8 +230,7 @@ static int usbtll_omap_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
>> break;
>> }
>>
>> - tll = devm_kzalloc(dev, sizeof(*tll) + sizeof(tll->ch_clk[nch]),
>> - GFP_KERNEL);
>> + tll = devm_kzalloc(dev, struct_size(tll, ch_clk, nch), GFP_KERNEL);
>> if (!tll) {
>> pm_runtime_put_sync(dev);
>> pm_runtime_disable(dev);
>>
>> --
>> 2.40.1
>>
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-06-26 17:26 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-06-20 21:22 [PATCH 0/2] mfd: omap-usb-tll: annotate struct usbtll_omap with __counted_by Javier Carrasco
2024-06-20 21:22 ` [PATCH 1/2] " Javier Carrasco
2024-06-26 15:28 ` (subset) " Lee Jones
2024-06-20 21:22 ` [PATCH 2/2] mfd: omap-usb-tll: use struct_size to allocate tll Javier Carrasco
2024-06-26 15:26 ` Lee Jones
2024-06-26 17:26 ` Javier Carrasco [this message]
2024-06-26 17:57 ` Jann Horn
2024-06-26 18:43 ` Kees Cook
2024-06-26 19:03 ` Javier Carrasco
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=5bfebb11-eee1-4c1e-bb2a-7c3b27d2af7b@gmail.com \
--to=javier.carrasco.cruz@gmail.com \
--cc=gustavoars@kernel.org \
--cc=kees@kernel.org \
--cc=lee@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-hardening@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-omap@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=tony@atomide.com \
/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.