On 09/22/16 11:31, SF Markus Elfring wrote:
> From: Markus Elfring <elfring@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Date: Thu, 22 Sep 2016 09:05:14 +0200
>
> A multiplication for the size determination of a memory allocation
> indicated that an array data structure should be processed.
> Thus use the corresponding function "kmalloc_array".
>
> This issue was detected by using the Coccinelle software.
>
> Signed-off-by: Markus Elfring <elfring@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> drivers/gpu/drm/tilcdc/tilcdc_slave_compat.c | 3 +--
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/tilcdc/tilcdc_slave_compat.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/tilcdc/tilcdc_slave_compat.c
> index f9c79da..8faa28f 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/tilcdc/tilcdc_slave_compat.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/tilcdc/tilcdc_slave_compat.c
> @@ -32,8 +32,7 @@ static int __init kfree_table_init(struct kfree_table *kft)
> {
> kft->total = 32;
> kft->num = 0;
> - kft->table = kmalloc(kft->total * sizeof(*kft->table),
> - GFP_KERNEL);
> + kft->table = kmalloc_array(kft->total, sizeof(*kft->table), GFP_KERNEL);
I was not sure if it is Ok to call kremalloc() for a pointer that was
previously allocated with kmalloc_array(). And at least it felt pointless.
But if you can confirm that it is ok, then sure I can take the patch.
Thanks,
Jyri
> if (!kft->table)
> return -ENOMEM;
>
>
_______________________________________________
dri-devel mailing list
dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
