netdev - Re: [PATCH rdma-next v2 08/13] RDMA/nldev: Allow optional-counter status configuration through RDMA netlink

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]

Date:   Mon, 4 Oct 2021 15:03:11 -0300
From:   Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...dia.com>
To:     Leon Romanovsky <leon@...nel.org>
Cc:     Doug Ledford <dledford@...hat.com>,
        Aharon Landau <aharonl@...dia.com>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Dennis Dalessandro <dennis.dalessandro@...nelisnetworks.com>,
        Gal Pressman <galpress@...zon.com>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org, Maor Gottlieb <maorg@...dia.com>,
        Mark Zhang <markzhang@...dia.com>,
        Mike Marciniszyn <mike.marciniszyn@...nelisnetworks.com>,
        Mustafa Ismail <mustafa.ismail@...el.com>,
        Naresh Kumar PBS <nareshkumar.pbs@...adcom.com>,
        Neta Ostrovsky <netao@...dia.com>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        Potnuri Bharat Teja <bharat@...lsio.com>,
        Saeed Mahameed <saeedm@...dia.com>,
        Selvin Xavier <selvin.xavier@...adcom.com>,
        Shiraz Saleem <shiraz.saleem@...el.com>,
        Yishai Hadas <yishaih@...dia.com>,
        Zhu Yanjun <zyjzyj2000@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH rdma-next v2 08/13] RDMA/nldev: Allow optional-counter
 status configuration through RDMA netlink

On Thu, Sep 30, 2021 at 11:02:24AM +0300, Leon Romanovsky wrote:
> -	if (nla_get_u32(tb[RDMA_NLDEV_ATTR_STAT_RES]) != RDMA_NLDEV_ATTR_RES_QP)
> -		return -EINVAL;
> +	target = kcalloc(BITS_TO_LONGS(stats->num_counters),
> +		       sizeof(long), GFP_KERNEL);
> +	if (!target)
> +		return -ENOMEM;

Same comment about the type here

This almost wants to be two patches to split up the set_doit then add
the new setter, it is hard to read..

Jason