From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
To: Thorsten Blum <thorsten.blum@linux.dev>
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 12:02:56 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <Z8gvYIYXMHRC-btB@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <04A79410-77DA-40F9-8904-44DC2DE1E810@linux.dev>
* 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?
> > 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.
Thanks,
Ingo
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-03-05 11:03 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 [this message]
2025-03-05 12:24 ` Thorsten Blum
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=Z8gvYIYXMHRC-btB@gmail.com \
--to=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-hardening@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-tip-commits@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=thorsten.blum@linux.dev \
--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