linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/2] bcachefs: Using vmalloc

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: <c5017d41-e83a-4139-a155-23247659673a@vivo.com>
Date: Mon, 11 Aug 2025 21:02:19 +0800
From: Liao Yuanhong <liaoyuanhong@...o.com>
To: Alan Huang <mmpgouride@...il.com>
Cc: Kent Overstreet <kent.overstreet@...ux.dev>,
 "open list:BCACHEFS" <linux-bcachefs@...r.kernel.org>,
 open list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] bcachefs: Using vmalloc_array() for array space
 allocation


On 8/11/2025 8:50 PM, Alan Huang wrote:
> [You don't often get email from mmpgouride@...il.com. Learn why this is important at https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification ]
>
> On Aug 11, 2025, at 20:09, Liao Yuanhong <liaoyuanhong@...o.com> wrote:
>> Replace kmalloc(size * sizeof) with kmalloc_array() for safer memory
>> allocation and overflow prevention.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Liao Yuanhong <liaoyuanhong@...o.com>
>> ---
>> fs/bcachefs/btree_key_cache.c    | 2 +-
>> fs/bcachefs/btree_trans_commit.c | 2 +-
>> 2 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/fs/bcachefs/btree_key_cache.c b/fs/bcachefs/btree_key_cache.c
>> index 4890cbc88e7c..8dd70024e513 100644
>> --- a/fs/bcachefs/btree_key_cache.c
>> +++ b/fs/bcachefs/btree_key_cache.c
>> @@ -136,7 +136,7 @@ static struct bkey_cached *__bkey_cached_alloc(unsigned key_u64s, gfp_t gfp)
>> struct bkey_cached *ck = kmem_cache_zalloc(bch2_key_cache, gfp);
>> if (unlikely(!ck))
>> return NULL;
>> - ck->k = kmalloc(key_u64s * sizeof(u64), gfp);
>> + ck->k = kmalloc_array(key_u64s, sizeof(u64), gfp);
>> if (unlikely(!ck->k)) {
>> kmem_cache_free(bch2_key_cache, ck);
>> return NULL;
>> diff --git a/fs/bcachefs/btree_trans_commit.c b/fs/bcachefs/btree_trans_commit.c
>> index 4d58bdb233e9..4102a3cb2410 100644
>> --- a/fs/bcachefs/btree_trans_commit.c
>> +++ b/fs/bcachefs/btree_trans_commit.c
>> @@ -396,7 +396,7 @@ btree_key_can_insert_cached_slowpath(struct btree_trans *trans, unsigned flags,
>> bch2_trans_unlock_updates_write(trans);
>> bch2_trans_unlock(trans);
>>
>> - new_k = kmalloc(new_u64s * sizeof(u64), GFP_KERNEL);
>> + new_k = kmalloc_array(new_u64s, sizeof(u64), GFP_KERNEL);
> No, it’s not an array.

Yes, there is a problem with this patch. Please ignore it.

Thanks,

Liao

>> if (!new_k) {
>> struct bch_fs *c = trans->c;
>> bch_err(c, "error allocating memory for key cache key, btree %s u64s %u",
>> --
>> 2.34.1
>>
>>