[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20230818193810.102a2581@kernel.org>
Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2023 19:38:10 -0700
From: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
To: "Gustavo A. R. Silva" <gustavoars@...nel.org>
Cc: Jamal Hadi Salim <jhs@...atatu.com>, Cong Wang
<xiyou.wangcong@...il.com>, Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>, "David S.
Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>, Paolo
Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-hardening@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH][next] net: sched: cls_u32: Fix allocation in u32_init()
On Thu, 17 Aug 2023 09:58:53 -0600 Gustavo A. R. Silva wrote:
> Subject: [PATCH][next] net: sched: cls_u32: Fix allocation in u32_init()
> Date: Thu, 17 Aug 2023 09:58:53 -0600
>
> Replace struct_size() with sizeof(), and avoid allocating 8 too many
> bytes.
What are you fixing?
> The following difference in binary output is expected and reflects the
> desired change:
>
> | net/sched/cls_u32.o
> | @@ -6148,7 +6148,7 @@
> | include/linux/slab.h:599
> | 2cf5: mov 0x0(%rip),%rdi # 2cfc <u32_init+0xfc>
> | 2cf8: R_X86_64_PC32 kmalloc_caches+0xc
> |- 2cfc: mov $0x98,%edx
> |+ 2cfc: mov $0x90,%edx
Sure, but why are you doing this? And how do you know the change is
correct?
There are 2 other instances where we allocate 1 entry or +1 entry.
Are they not all wrong?
Also some walking code seems to walk <= divisor, divisor IIUC being
the array bound - 1?
Jamal acked so changes are this is right, but I'd really like to
understand what's going on, and I shouldn't have to ask you all
these questions :S
--
pw-bot: cr
Powered by blists - more mailing lists