[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID:
<AS8PR02MB72373149E1A5A57D84D196CC8BE02@AS8PR02MB7237.eurprd02.prod.outlook.com>
Date: Sat, 11 May 2024 15:33:34 +0200
From: Erick Archer <erick.archer@...look.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
Cc: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...nel.org>,
Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com>,
Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...nel.org>, Ian Rogers <irogers@...gle.com>,
Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@...el.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
"Gustavo A. R. Silva" <gustavoars@...nel.org>,
Erick Archer <erick.archer@...look.com>, x86@...nel.org,
linux-perf-users@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-hardening@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] perf/x86/intel/uncore: Prefer struct_size over open
coded arithmetic
Hi everyone,
On Sat, Mar 30, 2024 at 03:32:59PM +0100, Erick Archer wrote:
> This is an effort to get rid of all multiplications from allocation
> functions in order to prevent integer overflows [1][2].
>
> As the "box" variable is a pointer to "struct intel_uncore_box" and
> this structure ends in a flexible array:
>
> struct intel_uncore_box {
> [...]
> struct intel_uncore_extra_reg shared_regs[];
> };
>
> the preferred way in the kernel is to use the struct_size() helper to
> do the arithmetic instead of the calculation "size + count * size" in
> the kzalloc_node() function.
>
> This way, the code is more readable and safer.
>
> This code was detected with the help of Coccinelle, and audited and
> modified manually.
>
> Link: https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/process/deprecated.html#open-coded-arithmetic-in-allocator-arguments [1]
> Link: https://github.com/KSPP/linux/issues/160 [2]
> Signed-off-by: Erick Archer <erick.archer@...look.com>
How could this patch be accepted?
Thanks,
Erick
Powered by blists - more mailing lists