From: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>
To: Erick Archer <erick.archer@gmx.com>
Cc: Florian Fainelli <florian.fainelli@broadcom.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
"Gustavo A. R. Silva" <gustavoars@kernel.org>,
linux-mips@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Broadcom internal kernel review list
<bcm-kernel-feedback-list@broadcom.com>,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
linux-hardening@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] irqchip/irq-bcm7038-l1: Prefer struct_size over open coded arithmetic
Date: Fri, 9 Feb 2024 16:20:11 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <202402091620.006E59FF9@keescook> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20240209183128.10273-1-erick.archer@gmx.com>
On Fri, Feb 09, 2024 at 07:31:28PM +0100, Erick Archer wrote:
> This is an effort to get rid of all multiplications from allocation
> functions in order to prevent integer overflows [1].
>
> As the cpu variable is a pointer to "struct bcm7038_l1_cpu" and this
> structure ends in a flexible array:
>
> struct bcm7038_l1_cpu {
> void __iomem *map_base;
> u32 mask_cache[];
> };
>
> the preferred way in the kernel is to use the struct_size() helper to
> do the arithmetic instead of the argument "size + count * size" in the
> kzalloc() function.
>
> This way, the code is more readable and more safer.
>
> Link: https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/process/deprecated.html#open-coded-arithmetic-in-allocator-arguments [1]
> Link: https://github.com/KSPP/linux/issues/162 [2]
>
> Signed-off-by: Erick Archer <erick.archer@gmx.com>
Yeah, looks right to me.
Reviewed-by: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>
--
Kees Cook
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-02-10 0:20 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-02-09 18:31 [PATCH] irqchip/irq-bcm7038-l1: Prefer struct_size over open coded arithmetic Erick Archer
2024-02-09 18:40 ` Gustavo A. R. Silva
2024-02-10 0:20 ` Kees Cook [this message]
2024-02-10 1:21 ` Florian Fainelli
2024-02-13 9:56 ` [tip: irq/core] " tip-bot2 for Erick Archer
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=202402091620.006E59FF9@keescook \
--to=keescook@chromium.org \
--cc=bcm-kernel-feedback-list@broadcom.com \
--cc=erick.archer@gmx.com \
--cc=florian.fainelli@broadcom.com \
--cc=gustavoars@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-hardening@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mips@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).