linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] fs: replace int param with size_t for seq_open

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

Message-ID: <20140901212250.GJ7996@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
Date:	Mon, 1 Sep 2014 22:22:50 +0100
From:	Al Viro <viro@...IV.linux.org.uk>
To:	Rob Jones <rob.jones@...ethink.co.uk>
Cc:	Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@...il.com>,
	Linux Kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] fs: replace int param with size_t for seq_open_private()

On Mon, Sep 01, 2014 at 03:38:51PM +0100, Rob Jones wrote:
> >>kmalloc where it is expected to be a size_t.
> >
> >Which is a mistake too because allocations are never that large.
> 
> Yet.

*raised eyebrow*

You do realize that kmalloc() gives physically contiguous allocation, right?
And refuses to allocate more than KMALLOC_MAX_SIZE, while we are at it.
With allocations anywhere near such range being very heavily discouraged.

There might or might not be point in using size_t for kmalloc() argument,
but "future-proofing" isn't it.
--
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/