linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] sparc: time: Use pointer from memcpy() call for assignment in setup_sparc64

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: <20251031095132.3db72d29@pumpkin>
Date: Fri, 31 Oct 2025 09:51:32 +0000
From: David Laight <david.laight.linux@...il.com>
To: Markus Elfring <Markus.Elfring@....de>
Cc: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>, sparclinux@...r.kernel.org,
 Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@...tlin.com>, Andreas Larsson
 <andreas@...sler.com>, Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux.com>, "David S. Miller"
 <davem@...emloft.net>, Finn Thain <fthain@...ux-m68k.org>, Tejun Heo
 <tj@...nel.org>, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
 kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org, Miaoqian Lin <linmq006@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] sparc: time: Use pointer from memcpy() call for
 assignment in setup_sparc64_timer()

On Fri, 31 Oct 2025 09:46:25 +0100
Markus Elfring <Markus.Elfring@....de> wrote:

> …>> +++ b/arch/sparc/kernel/time_64.c
> >> @@ -760,9 +760,7 @@ void setup_sparc64_timer(void)
> >>                              : /* no outputs */
> >>                              : "r" (pstate));
> >>
> >> -       sevt = this_cpu_ptr(&sparc64_events);
> >> -
> >> -       memcpy(sevt, &sparc64_clockevent, sizeof(*sevt));
> >> +       sevt = memcpy(this_cpu_ptr(&sparc64_events), &sparc64_clockevent, sizeof(*sevt));  
> > 
> > IMHO this makes the code harder to read:
> >   - Only 0.15% of the memcpy() calls in the kernel use the
> >     memcpy() chaining feature,  
> 
> I obviously propose to refactor this implementation detail.

Reduce it to 0% and the kernel memcpy() can be made 'void'. :-)
That will simplify the architecture specific implementations.

The same can be done for strcpy() and strcat() (etc).
Where the 'useful' return value would be the address of the '\0'.

	David