linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 0/2] Convert media drivers to use devm_kmemdup

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: <Z8_YsIMCJ0zirqN1@black.fi.intel.com>
Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2025 08:31:12 +0200
From: Raag Jadav <raag.jadav@...el.com>
To: Sakari Ailus <sakari.ailus@...ux.intel.com>
Cc: eugen.hristev@...aro.org, mchehab@...nel.org,
	nicolas.ferre@...rochip.com, alexandre.belloni@...tlin.com,
	claudiu.beznea@...on.dev, hugues.fruchet@...s.st.com,
	alain.volmat@...s.st.com, mcoquelin.stm32@...il.com,
	alexandre.torgue@...s.st.com, andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com,
	hverkuil-cisco@...all.nl, linux-media@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/2] Convert media drivers to use devm_kmemdup_array()

On Mon, Mar 10, 2025 at 10:53:57AM +0000, Sakari Ailus wrote:
> Hi Raag,
> 
> On Mon, Mar 10, 2025 at 08:45:12AM +0200, Raag Jadav wrote:
> > On Fri, Feb 28, 2025 at 01:06:47PM +0530, Raag Jadav wrote:
> > > This series converts media drivers to use the newly introduced[1]
> > > devm_kmemdup_array() helper. This depends on changes available on
> > > immutable tag[2].
> > > 
> > > [1] https://lore.kernel.org/r/20250212062513.2254767-1-raag.jadav@intel.com
> > > [2] https://lore.kernel.org/r/Z7xGpz3Q4Zj6YHx7@black.fi.intel.com
> > 
> > Bump, anything I can do to move this forward?
> 
> The patches these depend on (those adding devm_kmemdup_array()) aren't in
> the Media tree yet. They don't seem urgent though so I'd just wait.

I was hoping the immutable tag would be useful here. But sure, no problem.

> Speaking of the patches themselves: I'd use *array instead of array[0] for
> sizeof argument.

I know it doesn't matter much to the compiler but since the source itself
is an array here, doesn't [0] make more sense?

Raag