From: Fabian Frederick
Date: Fri, 14 Nov 2014 19:36:42 +0100
> kmalloc_array manages count*sizeof overflow.
>
> Signed-off-by: Fabian Frederick
Applied, and yes I read Joe's feedback and the rest of this thread
wrt. sizeof(u8/s8). That can be done as a followup.
--
To unsubscribe from this
From: Fabian Frederick f...@skynet.be
Date: Fri, 14 Nov 2014 19:36:42 +0100
kmalloc_array manages count*sizeof overflow.
Signed-off-by: Fabian Frederick f...@skynet.be
Applied, and yes I read Joe's feedback and the rest of this thread
wrt. sizeof(u8/s8). That can be done as a followup.
--
On Fri, 2014-11-14 at 20:32 +0100, Fabian Frederick wrote:
> On 14 November 2014 at 20:14 Joe Perches wrote:
> > On Fri, 2014-11-14 at 20:02 +0100, Fabian Frederick wrote:
> > > On 14 November 2014 at 19:47 Joe Perches wrote:
> > > > On Fri, 2014-11-14 at 19:36 +0100, Fabian Frederick wrote:
> >
> On 14 November 2014 at 20:14 Joe Perches wrote:
>
>
> On Fri, 2014-11-14 at 20:02 +0100, Fabian Frederick wrote:
> > On 14 November 2014 at 19:47 Joe Perches wrote:
> > > On Fri, 2014-11-14 at 19:36 +0100, Fabian Frederick wrote:
> > > > kmalloc_array manages count*sizeof overflow.
> > >
> >
On Fri, 2014-11-14 at 20:02 +0100, Fabian Frederick wrote:
> On 14 November 2014 at 19:47 Joe Perches wrote:
> > On Fri, 2014-11-14 at 19:36 +0100, Fabian Frederick wrote:
> > > kmalloc_array manages count*sizeof overflow.
> >
> > Fundamentally correct, but is this necessary or useful?
> >
> On 14 November 2014 at 19:47 Joe Perches wrote:
>
>
> On Fri, 2014-11-14 at 19:36 +0100, Fabian Frederick wrote:
> > kmalloc_array manages count*sizeof overflow.
>
> Fundamentally correct, but is this necessary or useful?
> sizeof(s8) isn't often going to be anything other than 1.
Absolutely,
On Fri, 2014-11-14 at 19:36 +0100, Fabian Frederick wrote:
> kmalloc_array manages count*sizeof overflow.
Fundamentally correct, but is this necessary or useful?
sizeof(s8) isn't often going to be anything other than 1.
Would the kernel even work without that assumption?
> diff --git
kmalloc_array manages count*sizeof overflow.
Signed-off-by: Fabian Frederick
---
net/dsa/dsa.c | 3 ++-
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/net/dsa/dsa.c b/net/dsa/dsa.c
index 4648f12..c00cca3 100644
--- a/net/dsa/dsa.c
+++ b/net/dsa/dsa.c
@@ -526,7 +526,8 @@ static int
kmalloc_array manages count*sizeof overflow.
Signed-off-by: Fabian Frederick f...@skynet.be
---
net/dsa/dsa.c | 3 ++-
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/net/dsa/dsa.c b/net/dsa/dsa.c
index 4648f12..c00cca3 100644
--- a/net/dsa/dsa.c
+++ b/net/dsa/dsa.c
@@ -526,7 +526,8
On Fri, 2014-11-14 at 19:36 +0100, Fabian Frederick wrote:
kmalloc_array manages count*sizeof overflow.
Fundamentally correct, but is this necessary or useful?
sizeof(s8) isn't often going to be anything other than 1.
Would the kernel even work without that assumption?
diff --git
On 14 November 2014 at 19:47 Joe Perches j...@perches.com wrote:
On Fri, 2014-11-14 at 19:36 +0100, Fabian Frederick wrote:
kmalloc_array manages count*sizeof overflow.
Fundamentally correct, but is this necessary or useful?
sizeof(s8) isn't often going to be anything other than 1.
On Fri, 2014-11-14 at 20:02 +0100, Fabian Frederick wrote:
On 14 November 2014 at 19:47 Joe Perches j...@perches.com wrote:
On Fri, 2014-11-14 at 19:36 +0100, Fabian Frederick wrote:
kmalloc_array manages count*sizeof overflow.
Fundamentally correct, but is this necessary or useful?
On 14 November 2014 at 20:14 Joe Perches j...@perches.com wrote:
On Fri, 2014-11-14 at 20:02 +0100, Fabian Frederick wrote:
On 14 November 2014 at 19:47 Joe Perches j...@perches.com wrote:
On Fri, 2014-11-14 at 19:36 +0100, Fabian Frederick wrote:
kmalloc_array manages count*sizeof
On Fri, 2014-11-14 at 20:32 +0100, Fabian Frederick wrote:
On 14 November 2014 at 20:14 Joe Perches j...@perches.com wrote:
On Fri, 2014-11-14 at 20:02 +0100, Fabian Frederick wrote:
On 14 November 2014 at 19:47 Joe Perches j...@perches.com wrote:
On Fri, 2014-11-14 at 19:36 +0100,
14 matches
Mail list logo
