RE: Adjusting further size determinations?

From: Julia Lawall
Date: Wed Oct 18 2017 - 09:32:15 EST




On Wed, 18 Oct 2017, David Laight wrote:

> From: SF Markus Elfring
> > >>>> Unpleasant consequences are possible in both cases.
> > >> How much do you care to reduce the failure probability further?
> > >
> > > Zero.
> >
> > I am interested to improve the software situation a bit more here.
>
> There are probably better places to spend your time!
>
> If you want 'security' for kmalloc() then:
>
> #define KMALLOC_TYPE(flags) (type *)kmalloc(sizeof (type), flags)
> #define KMALLOC(ptr, flags) *(ptr) = KMALLOC_TYPE(typeof *(ptr), flags)
>
> and change:
> ptr = kmalloc(sizeof *ptr, flags);
> to:
> KMALLOC(&ptr, flags);
>
> But it is all churn for churn's sake.

Please don't. Coccinelle won't find real problems with kmalloc any more
if this is done.

julia