linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH -next v2] checkpatch: Add check for array allocator family argument order

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]

Date:   Mon, 7 Nov 2022 09:25:58 +0800
From:   "liaochang (A)" <liaochang1@...wei.com>
To:     Christophe JAILLET <christophe.jaillet@...adoo.fr>,
        Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>, <apw@...onical.com>,
        <dwaipayanray1@...il.com>, <lukas.bulwahn@...il.com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
CC:     <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <bagasdotme@...il.com>,
        <pbonzini@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH -next v2] checkpatch: Add check for array allocator family
 argument order



在 2022/11/6 5:36, Christophe JAILLET 写道:
> 
> Le 05/11/2022 à 18:24, Joe Perches a écrit :
>> On Fri, 2022-11-04 at 18:08 +0100, Christophe JAILLET wrote:
>>> Le 04/11/2022 à 08:05, Liao Chang a écrit :
>>>> These array allocator family are sometimes misused with the first and
>>>> second arguments switchted.
>>>>
>>>> Same issue with calloc, kvcalloc, kvmalloc_array etc.
>>>>
>>>> Bleat if sizeof is the first argument.
>>>>
>>>> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/5374345c-7973-6a3c-d559-73bf4ac15079@redhat.com/
>>>> Signed-off-by: Liao Chang <liaochang1@...wei.com>
>>>> Acked-by: Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>
>>>> ---
>>>> v2:
>>>> 1. Acked-by Joe Perches.
>>>> 2. Use lore links in Link tag.
>>>>
>>>> ---
>>>>    scripts/checkpatch.pl | 2 +-
>>>>    1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/scripts/checkpatch.pl b/scripts/checkpatch.pl
>>>> index 1e5e66ae5a52..a9a9dc277cff 100755
>>>> --- a/scripts/checkpatch.pl
>>>> +++ b/scripts/checkpatch.pl
>>>> @@ -7128,7 +7128,7 @@ sub process {
>>>>            }
>>>>       # check for alloc argument mismatch
>>>> -        if ($line =~ /\b((?:devm_)?(?:kcalloc|kmalloc_array))\s*\(\s*sizeof\b/) {
>>>> +        if ($line =~ /\b((?:devm_)?((?:k|kv)?(calloc|malloc_array)(?:_node)?))\s*\(\s*sizeof\b/) {
>>>>                WARN("ALLOC_ARRAY_ARGS",
>>>>                     "$1 uses number as first arg, sizeof is generally wrong\n" . $herecurr);
>>>>            }
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> Should the devm_ and not devm_ cases be separated?
>>>
>>> In the devm_case, sizeof will never be just after the first '('.
>> Right.
>>
>> Likely this works better:
>> ---
>>   scripts/checkpatch.pl | 10 ++++++++--
>>   1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/scripts/checkpatch.pl b/scripts/checkpatch.pl
>> index 7be93c3df2bcb..7f37976a9f8b5 100755
>> --- a/scripts/checkpatch.pl
>> +++ b/scripts/checkpatch.pl
>> @@ -7145,12 +7145,18 @@ sub process {
>>                    "Reusing the krealloc arg is almost always a bug\n" . $herecurr);
>>           }
>>   -# check for alloc argument mismatch
>> -        if ($line =~ /\b((?:devm_)?(?:kcalloc|kmalloc_array))\s*\(\s*sizeof\b/) {
>> +# check for alloc argument mismatch in alloc functions
>> +        if ($line =~ /\b(((?:k|kv)?(calloc|malloc_array)(?:_node)?))\s*\(\s*sizeof\b/) {
>>               WARN("ALLOC_ARRAY_ARGS",
>>                    "$1 uses number as first arg, sizeof is generally wrong\n" . $herecurr);
>>           }
>>   +# check for alloc argument mismatch in devm_ alloc functions
>> +        if ($line =~ /\b(devm_((?:k|kv)?(calloc|malloc_array)(?:_node)?))\s*\(\s*$FuncArg\s*,\s*sizeof\b/) {
>> +            WARN("ALLOC_ARRAY_ARGS",
>> +                 "$1 uses number as second arg, sizeof is generally wrong\n" . $herecurr);
>> +        }
>> +
>>   # check for multiple semicolons
>>           if ($line =~ /;\s*;\s*$/) {
>>               if (WARN("ONE_SEMICOLON",
>>
> +1
> 
+1, thanks.

BTW, i find the v2 has been added to the -mm mm-nonmm-unstable branch,
do i need to submit new version includes above change?

> 
> .

-- 
BR,
Liao, Chang