[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.20.1803080722300.3754@hadrien>
Date: Thu, 8 Mar 2018 07:24:47 +0100 (CET)
From: Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@...6.fr>
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>,
cocci@...teme.lip6.fr, Himanshu Jha <himanshujha199640@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] mm: Add kvmalloc_ab_c and kvzalloc_struct
On Wed, 7 Mar 2018, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 07, 2018 at 10:18:21PM +0100, Julia Lawall wrote:
> > > Otherwise, yes, please. We could build a coccinelle rule for
> > > additional replacements...
> >
> > A potential semantic patch and the changes it generates are attached
> > below. Himanshu Jha helped with its development. Working on this
> > uncovered one bug, where the allocated array is too large, because the
> > size provided for it was a structure size, but actually only pointers to
> > that structure were to be stored in it.
>
> This is cool! Thanks for doing the coccinelle patch! Diffstat:
>
> 50 files changed, 81 insertions(+), 124 deletions(-)
>
> I find that pretty compelling. I'll repost the kvmalloc_struct patch
> imminently.
Thanks. So it's OK to replace kmalloc and kzalloc, even though they
didn't previously consider vmalloc and even though kmalloc doesn't zero?
There are a few other cases that use GFP_NOFS and GFP_NOWAIT, but I didn't
transform those because the comment says that the flags should be
GFP_KERNEL based. Should those be transformed too?
julia
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.
