linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 5/5] pinctrl: at91: Utilise temporary variable for struct device

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: <Y/0snOSbw+oTyL65@smile.fi.intel.com>
Date:   Tue, 28 Feb 2023 00:20:12 +0200
From:   Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>
To:     Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>
Cc:     Claudiu.Beznea@...rochip.com, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
        linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Ludovic.Desroches@...rochip.com, Nicolas.Ferre@...rochip.com,
        alexandre.belloni@...tlin.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 5/5] pinctrl: at91: Utilise temporary variable for
 struct device

On Mon, Feb 27, 2023 at 10:44:21PM +0100, Linus Walleij wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 17, 2023 at 12:59 PM Andy Shevchenko
> <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com> wrote:
> > On Fri, Feb 17, 2023 at 11:54:02AM +0000, Claudiu.Beznea@...rochip.com wrote:
> > > On 15.02.2023 15:42, Andy Shevchenko wrote:

...

> > > >                 girq->num_parents = 1;
> > > > -               girq->parents = devm_kcalloc(&pdev->dev, 1,
> > > > +               girq->parents = devm_kcalloc(dev, girq->num_parents,
> > >
> > > There is still the change of the 2nd argument of devm_kcalloc() from 1 ->
> > > girq->num_parents (no functional change, though) which doesn't match the
> > > purpose of the patch and is not specified anywhere. Other than this:
> > >
> > > Reviewed-by: Claudiu Beznea <claudiu.beznea@...rochip.com>
> > >
> > > >                                              sizeof(*girq->parents),
> > > >                                              GFP_KERNEL);
> >
n
> > Thanks for review. I have no time to fix this. So if Linus is okay to take
> > the first 4 patches, I'm fine. You or somebody else can submit an updated
> > 5th patch later on.
> 
> I applied all 5 patches. The num_parents is set to 1 on the line right
> above and it's the right thing to do, and has a reviewed tag so I don't
> see the problem with this patch, let's not overinvest in process.
> 
> Thanks for the very nice cleanups!

Thank you!

> I applied it locally so it won't be in linux-next until after the merge
> window closes.

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko