[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1518637426.3678.21.camel@perches.com>
Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2018 11:43:46 -0800
From: Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>
To: Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>
Cc: Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>, Andrew Morton
<akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, Matthew Wilcox <mawilcox@...rosoft.com>,
Linux-MM <linux-mm@...ck.org>, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Kernel
Hardening <kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] Add kvzalloc_struct to complement kvzalloc_array
On Wed, 2018-02-14 at 11:36 -0800, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 14, 2018 at 11:32:45AM -0800, Joe Perches wrote:
> > On Wed, 2018-02-14 at 11:23 -0800, Kees Cook wrote:
> > > On Wed, Feb 14, 2018 at 10:47 AM, Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com> wrote:
> > > > I think expanding the number of allocation functions
> > > > is not necessary.
> > >
> > > I think removing common mispatterns in favor of overflow-protected
> > > allocation functions makes sense.
> >
> > Function symmetry matters too.
> >
> > These allocation functions are specific to kvz<foo>
> > and are not symmetric for k<foo>, v<foo>, devm_<foo>
> > <foo>_node, and the like.
>
> If somebody wants them, then we can add them.
Yeah, but I don't think any of it is necessary.
How many of these struct+bufsize * count entries
actually exist?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use?
Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia
and check out these
guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.
