linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] dt/sparc: Introduce the use of the managed version of kzalloc

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.10.1405230806590.3738@hadrien>
Date:	Fri, 23 May 2014 08:07:38 +0800 (SGT)
From:	Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@...6.fr>
To:	Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@...il.com>
cc:	Himangi Saraogi <himangi774@...il.com>,
	linux-input@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] dt/sparc: Introduce the use of the managed version of
 kzalloc



On Thu, 22 May 2014, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:

> Hi Julia,
>
> On Fri, May 23, 2014 at 07:03:37AM +0800, Julia Lawall wrote:
> >
> >
> > On Thu, 22 May 2014, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
> >
> > > Hi Himangi,
> > >
> > > On Fri, May 23, 2014 at 01:04:30AM +0530, Himangi Saraogi wrote:
> > > > This patch moves data allocated using kzalloc to managed data allocated
> > > > using devm_kzalloc and cleans now unnecessary kfrees in probe and remove
> > > > functions. Also the unnecessary labels are done away with.
> > >
> > > Please no more partial devm conversions. I am not interested in patches
> > > that change only 1 resource to be managed and leaving the rest as is.
> > >
> > > If you want to do devm conversion please do it if you convert all (or at
> > > least majority) of resource handling to managed resources.
> >
> > Sorry, I don't think we are clear on what is wanted.  Himangi's patches
> > convert everything where a devm function is already available (to our
> > knowledge).  Do you prefer that new devm functions be introduced?  On the
> > one hand, that is perhaps useful from a safety point of view.  On the
> > other hand, it could lead to a huge number of rarely used devm functions
> > that no one knows about and to a lot of code diversity.  So I don't know
> > what is the good solution.
>
> I strongly dislike changes that mix managed and non-managed resources in
> the same driver as it only leads to confusion: should this resource be
> freed or will it be freed automatically.
>
> I am applying patches that convert all (or almost all) resources in a
> driver into managed ones, but if that is not [currently] possible then
> those drivers are probably better left alone (maybe after additional
> audit).

OK, we will try to take that into account.  Are the new managed functoins
added to the devres docuentation?

thanks,
julia
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/