[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <737f08bfa48ba706952bba91e823129f0dba1389.1602020074.git.gustavoars@kernel.org>
Date: Wed, 7 Oct 2020 11:04:49 -0500
From: "Gustavo A. R. Silva" <gustavoars@...nel.org>
To: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc: linux-hardening@...r.kernel.org,
Alex Deucher <alexander.deucher@....com>,
Christian König <christian.koenig@....com>,
David Airlie <airlied@...ux.ie>,
Daniel Vetter <daniel@...ll.ch>, amd-gfx@...ts.freedesktop.org,
dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org,
"Gustavo A. R. Silva" <gustavoars@...nel.org>
Subject: [PATCH 04/14] drm/amd/pm: Replace one-element array with
flexible-array in struct phm_uvd_clock_voltage_dependency_table
There is a regular need in the kernel to provide a way to declare having
a dynamically sized set of trailing elements in a structure. Kernel code
should always use “flexible array members”[1] for these cases. The older
style of one-element or zero-length arrays should no longer be used[2].
Refactor the code according to the use of a flexible-array member in
struct phm_uvd_clock_voltage_dependency_table, instead of a one-element
array, and use the struct_size() helper to calculate the size for the
allocation.
Also, save some heap space as the original code is multiplying
table->numEntries by sizeof(struct phm_uvd_clock_voltage_dependency_table)
when it should have multiplied it by sizeof(phm_uvd_clock_voltage_dependency_record)
instead.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flexible_array_member
[2] https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/v5.9-rc1/process/deprecated.html#zero-length-and-one-element-arrays
Build-tested-by: kernel test robot <lkp@...el.com>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/5f7c433e.pXkC6KsN6HN%2FLdhj%25lkp@intel.com/
Signed-off-by: Gustavo A. R. Silva <gustavoars@...nel.org>
---
drivers/gpu/drm/amd/pm/inc/hwmgr.h | 2 +-
.../gpu/drm/amd/pm/powerplay/hwmgr/processpptables.c | 11 ++++-------
2 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/pm/inc/hwmgr.h b/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/pm/inc/hwmgr.h
index e84cff09af2d..2f1886bc5535 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/pm/inc/hwmgr.h
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/pm/inc/hwmgr.h
@@ -140,7 +140,7 @@ struct phm_uvd_clock_voltage_dependency_record {
struct phm_uvd_clock_voltage_dependency_table {
uint8_t count;
- struct phm_uvd_clock_voltage_dependency_record entries[1];
+ struct phm_uvd_clock_voltage_dependency_record entries[];
};
struct phm_acp_clock_voltage_dependency_record {
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/pm/powerplay/hwmgr/processpptables.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/pm/powerplay/hwmgr/processpptables.c
index d9bed4df6f65..305d95c4162d 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/pm/powerplay/hwmgr/processpptables.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/pm/powerplay/hwmgr/processpptables.c
@@ -1105,15 +1105,12 @@ static int get_uvd_clock_voltage_limit_table(struct pp_hwmgr *hwmgr,
const ATOM_PPLIB_UVD_Clock_Voltage_Limit_Table *table,
const UVDClockInfoArray *array)
{
- unsigned long table_size, i;
+ unsigned long i;
struct phm_uvd_clock_voltage_dependency_table *uvd_table;
- table_size = sizeof(unsigned long) +
- sizeof(struct phm_uvd_clock_voltage_dependency_table) *
- table->numEntries;
-
- uvd_table = kzalloc(table_size, GFP_KERNEL);
- if (NULL == uvd_table)
+ uvd_table = kzalloc(struct_size(uvd_table, entries, table->numEntries),
+ GFP_KERNEL);
+ if (!uvd_table)
return -ENOMEM;
uvd_table->count = table->numEntries;
--
2.27.0
Powered by blists - more mailing lists