* [PATCH] x86/microcode/intel: Fix allocation size of struct ucode_patch
@ 2017-01-05 1:03 Junichi Nomura
2017-01-05 10:23 ` Borislav Petkov
` (2 more replies)
0 siblings, 3 replies; 8+ messages in thread
From: Junichi Nomura @ 2017-01-05 1:03 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: bp, x86, linux-kernel; +Cc: tglx, mingo, hpa
We allocate struct ucode_patch here.
"size" is a size of microcode data and used for kmemdup() later
in this function.
Signed-off-by: Jun'ichi Nomura <j-nomura@ce.jp.nec.com>
Fixes: 06b8534cb728 ("x86/microcode: Rework microcode loading")
diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/intel.c b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/intel.c
index aee3cb5..042f329 100644
--- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/intel.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/intel.c
@@ -150,7 +150,7 @@ static struct ucode_patch *__alloc_microcode_buf(void *data, unsigned int size)
{
struct ucode_patch *p;
- p = kzalloc(size, GFP_KERNEL);
+ p = kzalloc(sizeof(struct ucode_patch), GFP_KERNEL);
if (!p)
return ERR_PTR(-ENOMEM);
--
Jun'ichi Nomura, NEC Corporation / NEC Solution Innovators, Ltd.
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] x86/microcode/intel: Fix allocation size of struct ucode_patch
2017-01-05 1:03 [PATCH] x86/microcode/intel: Fix allocation size of struct ucode_patch Junichi Nomura
@ 2017-01-05 10:23 ` Borislav Petkov
2017-01-05 17:44 ` Andy Shevchenko
2017-01-09 22:17 ` [tip:x86/urgent] " tip-bot for Junichi Nomura
2 siblings, 0 replies; 8+ messages in thread
From: Borislav Petkov @ 2017-01-05 10:23 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Junichi Nomura; +Cc: x86, linux-kernel, tglx, mingo, hpa
On Thu, Jan 05, 2017 at 01:03:51AM +0000, Junichi Nomura wrote:
> We allocate struct ucode_patch here.
>
> "size" is a size of microcode data and used for kmemdup() later
> in this function.
>
> Signed-off-by: Jun'ichi Nomura <j-nomura@ce.jp.nec.com>
> Fixes: 06b8534cb728 ("x86/microcode: Rework microcode loading")
>
> diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/intel.c b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/intel.c
> index aee3cb5..042f329 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/intel.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/intel.c
> @@ -150,7 +150,7 @@ static struct ucode_patch *__alloc_microcode_buf(void *data, unsigned int size)
> {
> struct ucode_patch *p;
>
> - p = kzalloc(size, GFP_KERNEL);
> + p = kzalloc(sizeof(struct ucode_patch), GFP_KERNEL);
> if (!p)
> return ERR_PTR(-ENOMEM);
>
> --
Applied, thanks.
--
Regards/Gruss,
Boris.
Good mailing practices for 400: avoid top-posting and trim the reply.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] x86/microcode/intel: Fix allocation size of struct ucode_patch
2017-01-05 1:03 [PATCH] x86/microcode/intel: Fix allocation size of struct ucode_patch Junichi Nomura
2017-01-05 10:23 ` Borislav Petkov
@ 2017-01-05 17:44 ` Andy Shevchenko
2017-01-05 23:52 ` Junichi Nomura
2017-01-09 22:17 ` [tip:x86/urgent] " tip-bot for Junichi Nomura
2 siblings, 1 reply; 8+ messages in thread
From: Andy Shevchenko @ 2017-01-05 17:44 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Junichi Nomura; +Cc: bp, x86, linux-kernel, tglx, mingo, hpa
On Thu, Jan 5, 2017 at 3:03 AM, Junichi Nomura <j-nomura@ce.jp.nec.com> wrote:
> We allocate struct ucode_patch here.
>
> "size" is a size of microcode data and used for kmemdup() later
> in this function.
>
> Signed-off-by: Jun'ichi Nomura <j-nomura@ce.jp.nec.com>
> Fixes: 06b8534cb728 ("x86/microcode: Rework microcode loading")
>
> diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/intel.c b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/intel.c
> index aee3cb5..042f329 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/intel.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/intel.c
> @@ -150,7 +150,7 @@ static struct ucode_patch *__alloc_microcode_buf(void *data, unsigned int size)
> {
> struct ucode_patch *p;
>
> - p = kzalloc(size, GFP_KERNEL);
> + p = kzalloc(sizeof(struct ucode_patch), GFP_KERNEL);
Perhaps sizeof(*p) ?
> if (!p)
> return ERR_PTR(-ENOMEM);
--
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] x86/microcode/intel: Fix allocation size of struct ucode_patch
2017-01-05 17:44 ` Andy Shevchenko
@ 2017-01-05 23:52 ` Junichi Nomura
2017-01-06 0:02 ` Borislav Petkov
0 siblings, 1 reply; 8+ messages in thread
From: Junichi Nomura @ 2017-01-05 23:52 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Andy Shevchenko; +Cc: bp, x86, linux-kernel, tglx, mingo, hpa
On 01/06/17 02:44, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 5, 2017 at 3:03 AM, Junichi Nomura <j-nomura@ce.jp.nec.com> wrote:
>> We allocate struct ucode_patch here.
>>
>> "size" is a size of microcode data and used for kmemdup() later
>> in this function.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Jun'ichi Nomura <j-nomura@ce.jp.nec.com>
>> Fixes: 06b8534cb728 ("x86/microcode: Rework microcode loading")
>>
>> diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/intel.c b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/intel.c
>> index aee3cb5..042f329 100644
>> --- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/intel.c
>> +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/intel.c
>> @@ -150,7 +150,7 @@ static struct ucode_patch *__alloc_microcode_buf(void *data, unsigned int size)
>> {
>> struct ucode_patch *p;
>>
>> - p = kzalloc(size, GFP_KERNEL);
>> + p = kzalloc(sizeof(struct ucode_patch), GFP_KERNEL);
>
> Perhaps sizeof(*p) ?
Yeah, that might be preferred.
>> if (!p)
>> return ERR_PTR(-ENOMEM);
--
Jun'ichi Nomura, NEC Corporation / NEC Solution Innovators, Ltd.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] x86/microcode/intel: Fix allocation size of struct ucode_patch
2017-01-05 23:52 ` Junichi Nomura
@ 2017-01-06 0:02 ` Borislav Petkov
2017-01-06 0:14 ` Junichi Nomura
0 siblings, 1 reply; 8+ messages in thread
From: Borislav Petkov @ 2017-01-06 0:02 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Junichi Nomura; +Cc: Andy Shevchenko, x86, linux-kernel, tglx, mingo, hpa
On Thu, Jan 05, 2017 at 11:52:07PM +0000, Junichi Nomura wrote:
> >> + p = kzalloc(sizeof(struct ucode_patch), GFP_KERNEL);
> >
> > Perhaps sizeof(*p) ?
>
> Yeah, that might be preferred.
No, those things are never preferred because
sizeof(struct <type>)
tells you exactly the size of what kind of object you're getting vs
sizeof(*p)
which tells you you're getting the size of what p points to.
Now you have to go look at p and what type it is. In the current case, p
is defined not far away from the use site but in a larger function, you
most likely need to eyeball up to its type when reading the code. Which
makes the whole thing less readable.
--
Regards/Gruss,
Boris.
Good mailing practices for 400: avoid top-posting and trim the reply.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] x86/microcode/intel: Fix allocation size of struct ucode_patch
2017-01-06 0:02 ` Borislav Petkov
@ 2017-01-06 0:14 ` Junichi Nomura
2017-01-06 10:56 ` Borislav Petkov
0 siblings, 1 reply; 8+ messages in thread
From: Junichi Nomura @ 2017-01-06 0:14 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Borislav Petkov; +Cc: Andy Shevchenko, x86, linux-kernel, tglx, mingo, hpa
On 01/06/17 09:02, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 05, 2017 at 11:52:07PM +0000, Junichi Nomura wrote:
>>>> + p = kzalloc(sizeof(struct ucode_patch), GFP_KERNEL);
>>>
>>> Perhaps sizeof(*p) ?
>>
>> Yeah, that might be preferred.
>
> No, those things are never preferred because
>
> sizeof(struct <type>)
>
> tells you exactly the size of what kind of object you're getting vs
>
> sizeof(*p)
>
> which tells you you're getting the size of what p points to.
>
> Now you have to go look at p and what type it is. In the current case, p
> is defined not far away from the use site but in a larger function, you
> most likely need to eyeball up to its type when reading the code. Which
> makes the whole thing less readable.
Personally I have same opinion as yours. :)
But according to Documentation/process/coding-style.rst, it seems
"sizeof(*p)" is preferred style and the reason there makes some
sense.
Quote from coding-style.rst:
> The preferred form for passing a size of a struct is the following:
>
> p = kmalloc(sizeof(*p), ...);
>
> The alternative form where struct name is spelled out hurts readability and
> introduces an opportunity for a bug when the pointer variable type is changed
> but the corresponding sizeof that is passed to a memory allocator is not.
I'm fine with either way.
--
Jun'ichi Nomura, NEC Corporation / NEC Solution Innovators, Ltd.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] x86/microcode/intel: Fix allocation size of struct ucode_patch
2017-01-06 0:14 ` Junichi Nomura
@ 2017-01-06 10:56 ` Borislav Petkov
0 siblings, 0 replies; 8+ messages in thread
From: Borislav Petkov @ 2017-01-06 10:56 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Junichi Nomura; +Cc: Andy Shevchenko, x86, linux-kernel, tglx, mingo, hpa
On Fri, Jan 06, 2017 at 12:14:13AM +0000, Junichi Nomura wrote:
> Personally I have same opinion as yours. :)
>
> But according to Documentation/process/coding-style.rst, it seems
> "sizeof(*p)" is preferred style and the reason there makes some
> sense.
>
> Quote from coding-style.rst:
> > The preferred form for passing a size of a struct is the following:
> >
> > p = kmalloc(sizeof(*p), ...);
> >
> > The alternative form where struct name is spelled out hurts readability and
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Yeah, right. Change is from 2005 (af4e5a218e18a). Pekka didn't know better then. :-P
--
Regards/Gruss,
Boris.
Good mailing practices for 400: avoid top-posting and trim the reply.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* [tip:x86/urgent] x86/microcode/intel: Fix allocation size of struct ucode_patch
2017-01-05 1:03 [PATCH] x86/microcode/intel: Fix allocation size of struct ucode_patch Junichi Nomura
2017-01-05 10:23 ` Borislav Petkov
2017-01-05 17:44 ` Andy Shevchenko
@ 2017-01-09 22:17 ` tip-bot for Junichi Nomura
2 siblings, 0 replies; 8+ messages in thread
From: tip-bot for Junichi Nomura @ 2017-01-09 22:17 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-tip-commits; +Cc: j-nomura, mingo, hpa, bp, tglx, linux-kernel
Commit-ID: 9fcf5ba2ef908af916e9002891fbbca20ce4dc98
Gitweb: http://git.kernel.org/tip/9fcf5ba2ef908af916e9002891fbbca20ce4dc98
Author: Junichi Nomura <j-nomura@ce.jp.nec.com>
AuthorDate: Mon, 9 Jan 2017 12:41:46 +0100
Committer: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
CommitDate: Mon, 9 Jan 2017 23:11:14 +0100
x86/microcode/intel: Fix allocation size of struct ucode_patch
We allocate struct ucode_patch here. @size is the size of microcode data
and used for kmemdup() later in this function.
Fixes: 06b8534cb728 ("x86/microcode: Rework microcode loading")
Signed-off-by: Jun'ichi Nomura <j-nomura@ce.jp.nec.com>
Signed-off-by: Borislav Petkov <bp@suse.de>
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/7a730dc9-ac17-35c4-fe76-dfc94e5ecd95@ce.jp.nec.com
Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
---
arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/intel.c | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/intel.c b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/intel.c
index faec8fa..9434865 100644
--- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/intel.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/intel.c
@@ -150,7 +150,7 @@ static struct ucode_patch *__alloc_microcode_buf(void *data, unsigned int size)
{
struct ucode_patch *p;
- p = kzalloc(size, GFP_KERNEL);
+ p = kzalloc(sizeof(struct ucode_patch), GFP_KERNEL);
if (!p)
return ERR_PTR(-ENOMEM);
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2017-01-09 22:18 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2017-01-05 1:03 [PATCH] x86/microcode/intel: Fix allocation size of struct ucode_patch Junichi Nomura
2017-01-05 10:23 ` Borislav Petkov
2017-01-05 17:44 ` Andy Shevchenko
2017-01-05 23:52 ` Junichi Nomura
2017-01-06 0:02 ` Borislav Petkov
2017-01-06 0:14 ` Junichi Nomura
2017-01-06 10:56 ` Borislav Petkov
2017-01-09 22:17 ` [tip:x86/urgent] " tip-bot for Junichi Nomura
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).