From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from sipsolutions.net (s3.sipsolutions.net [168.119.38.16]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1307C217F3F for ; Sat, 26 Oct 2024 08:03:44 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=168.119.38.16 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1729929826; cv=none; b=mOdXY/1TXTgs0VEz/ksWyG3lEQwDQb7WaMJ5StCs0FK1NT8KV3ZuOFfeYgldGwFPRsQOjWbEFKFSZjsF2ZmfG32Yp528bsRfvkHrwm0ekiMC6av2h8GU1z5JjgFeTY9z2wzCJpi+0+tv8h/tVynoEoJktQetYQMzMxpwl1cu8mU= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1729929826; c=relaxed/simple; bh=8xvFuMBW1keE9gV9hm4gKhkdue9DAfMsI9BXde4g/fg=; h=Message-ID:Subject:From:To:Cc:Date:In-Reply-To:References: Content-Type:MIME-Version; b=UGDpAoDTuYSwhKxHs32PiWfHxvJWqRqrdYRwU0oIcg4CaZxjhgyTfxbLxGmiyEXYUktbzjbiWl9iYmQlybm2AaSBCXga65ULu7FdCdonafOEzfoyyV0uzyuD1smnPRstEMLhNDfRda1A910q1IGrj3nH/nLB7t1f6Y4+NUuulls= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=sipsolutions.net; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=sipsolutions.net; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=sipsolutions.net header.i=@sipsolutions.net header.b=w+oIrVvf; arc=none smtp.client-ip=168.119.38.16 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=sipsolutions.net Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=sipsolutions.net Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=sipsolutions.net header.i=@sipsolutions.net header.b="w+oIrVvf" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=sipsolutions.net; s=mail; h=MIME-Version:Content-Transfer-Encoding: Content-Type:References:In-Reply-To:Date:Cc:To:From:Subject:Message-ID:Sender :Reply-To:Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-To: Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID; bh=8xvFuMBW1keE9gV9hm4gKhkdue9DAfMsI9BXde4g/fg=; t=1729929825; x=1731139425; b=w+oIrVvfgRPIoLxc1LbygBpgbhJR7XADKm3W/PIQakoh3UM I3pVALB6UelW9nKt/Urp0r91vLDqcMUMa8X6ZY9G1aSS/dVevwC6CKol5P+uePmno8YLTCBH9owO8 2gEny/EskNM9MIqGhObYNpdMk0UF1aKsYXVR7sIaGsWLpJ/AuHds6KcXHAcLopNl+0UGduWuIf8EF KKyTrU5b4P6yO77gXLk1D8SEKZ1v0NV9eY0IO0yhZ3cxxi5sBgpeMYfGwR5DTzQw1hqmVSHPxt1Sx M6ryNSmlk49qAS6w5SA1DyIacl7UenKx0XcN2Jd11jVjgZGB9YMSHYolx8u29pnw==; Received: by sipsolutions.net with esmtpsa (TLS1.3:ECDHE_X25519__RSA_PSS_RSAE_SHA256__AES_256_GCM:256) (Exim 4.98) (envelope-from ) id 1t4blq-00000005Jb4-0fRQ; Sat, 26 Oct 2024 10:03:38 +0200 Message-ID: <433fb0eb0132a583dc5f575f0c99c4adb8ef6cab.camel@sipsolutions.net> Subject: Re: [PATCH][next] um: Malloc just enough space for fitting pid file From: Johannes Berg To: Paulo Miguel Almeida Cc: richard@nod.at, anton.ivanov@cambridgegreys.com, kees@kernel.org, tiwei.btw@antgroup.com, linux-um@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Date: Sat, 26 Oct 2024 10:03:37 +0200 In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable User-Agent: Evolution 3.52.4 (3.52.4-2.fc40) Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 X-malware-bazaar: not-scanned On Sat, 2024-10-26 at 20:59 +1300, Paulo Miguel Almeida wrote: >=20 > when I said that "umid is already generated during make_umid_init > __initcall", from my humble point of view, I was explaining the 'why' > using UMID_LEN for calculation buffer sizes was redundant. Then again, > once we know the size of char* umid, we can use strlen(umid) instead. That's not "why am I changing it" though, that's "why does it work". The only reasonable explanation I could come up with is that you're trying to save memory ... but why go to the trouble for a function that's called exactly once? johannes