public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Thorsten Blum <thorsten.blum@linux.dev>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-tip-commits@vger.kernel.org,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
	x86@kernel.org, linux-hardening@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [tip: perf/core] perf/x86: Annotate struct bts_buffer with __counted_by()
Date: Wed, 5 Mar 2025 13:24:11 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <0921EF60-73BB-481C-AC5E-152470BBAB79@linux.dev> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Z8gvYIYXMHRC-btB@gmail.com>

On 5. Mar 2025, at 12:02, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> * Thorsten Blum <thorsten.blum@linux.dev> wrote:
>> On 5. Mar 2025, at 10:18, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>>> Actually, on a second thought:
>>> 
>>>> - buf = kzalloc_node(offsetof(struct bts_buffer, buf[nbuf]), GFP_KERNEL, node);
>>>> + buf = kzalloc_node(struct_size(buf, buf, nbuf), GFP_KERNEL, node);
>>> 
>>> Firstly, in what world is 'buf, buf' more readable? One is a member of 
>>> a structure, the other is the name of the structure - and they match, 
>>> which shows that this function's naming conventions are a mess.
>>> 
>>> Which should be fixed first ...
>> 
>> Yes, I noticed this too, but since buf->buf[] is used all over the place
>> (also in other functions), I didn't rename it in this patch.
>> 
>> We could just keep offsetof(struct bts_buffer, buf[nbuf]), or use
>> struct_size_t(struct bts_buffer, buf, nbuf) and still benefit from
>> additional compile-time checks, or rename the local variable to struct
>> bts_buffer *bts and use struct_size(bts, buf, nbuf), for example. Any
>> preferences or other ideas?
> 
> To clean up this code before changing it, so that the changes become 
> obvious to review.
> 
> Please also split out the annotation for instrumentation, it's separate 
> from any struct_size() changes, right?

Yes, I'll send a v2 with the __counted_by() annotation and submit a
separate patch for struct_size() and other changes.

>>> I'm also not sure the code is correct ...
>> 
>> Which part of it?
> 
> The size calculation. On a second reading I *think* it's correct, but 
> it's unnecessarily confusing due to the buf<->buf aliasing.
> 
> So in a cleaned up version of the code:
> 
> - If we name 'struct bts_buffer' objects 'bb'
> - and bb:buf[] is the var-array
> - and we rename 'nbuf' to 'nr_buf' (the number of bb:buf[] elements)
> 
> then the code right now does:
> 
>       bb = kzalloc_node(offsetof(struct bts_buffer, bb[nr_buf]), GFP_KERNEL, node);
> 
> ... which looks correct.

If bb:buf[] is the flexible array, it should be buf[nr_buf] like this:

	bb = kzalloc_node(offsetof(struct bts_buffer, buf[nr_buf]), GFP_KERNEL, node);

Thanks,
Thorsten


      reply	other threads:[~2025-03-05 12:24 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2025-03-04 18:30 [PATCH] perf/x86: Annotate struct bts_buffer with __counted_by() Thorsten Blum
2025-03-04 19:12 ` [tip: perf/core] " tip-bot2 for Thorsten Blum
2025-03-05  9:18   ` Ingo Molnar
2025-03-05 10:47     ` Thorsten Blum
2025-03-05 11:02       ` Ingo Molnar
2025-03-05 12:24         ` Thorsten Blum [this message]

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=0921EF60-73BB-481C-AC5E-152470BBAB79@linux.dev \
    --to=thorsten.blum@linux.dev \
    --cc=linux-hardening@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-tip-commits@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@kernel.org \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=x86@kernel.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox