[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20220719161836.b0ad5cdfb0aec0c04a862122@linux-foundation.org>
Date: Tue, 19 Jul 2022 16:18:36 -0700
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Kassey Li <quic_yingangl@...cinc.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Sasha Levin <sashal@...nel.org>,
Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@....com>,
Minchan Kim <minchan@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm/cma_debug.c: align the name buffer length as struct
cma
On Tue, 19 Jul 2022 17:15:54 +0800 Kassey Li <quic_yingangl@...cinc.com> wrote:
> Signed-off-by: Kassey Li <quic_yingangl@...cinc.com>
> ---
> mm/cma_debug.c | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/mm/cma_debug.c b/mm/cma_debug.c
> index 2e7704955f4f..c3ffe253e055 100644
> --- a/mm/cma_debug.c
> +++ b/mm/cma_debug.c
> @@ -163,7 +163,7 @@ DEFINE_DEBUGFS_ATTRIBUTE(cma_alloc_fops, NULL, cma_alloc_write, "%llu\n");
> static void cma_debugfs_add_one(struct cma *cma, struct dentry *root_dentry)
> {
> struct dentry *tmp;
> - char name[16];
> + char name[CMA_MAX_NAME];
>
> scnprintf(name, sizeof(name), "cma-%s", cma->name);
Seems logical. But as CMA_MAX_NAME=64, this could result in alteration
of the output: less truncation of the original name.
Is it the case that the output is never >16 chars anyway? If so, we'll
be OK.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists