Although using literals for size calculation in allocator arguments may be harmless due to compiler warnings in case of overflows, it is better to refactor the code to avoid the use of open-coded math idiom. So, clarify the preferred way in these cases. Suggested-by: Kees Cook <keescook@xxxxxxxxxxxx> Signed-off-by: Len Baker <len.baker@xxxxxxx> --- Changelog v1 -> v2 - Clarify the sentence by changing "keep <foo> out" with "avoid <foo>" (Joe Perches). Documentation/process/deprecated.rst | 3 ++- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/Documentation/process/deprecated.rst b/Documentation/process/deprecated.rst index 9d83b8db8874..b5a8be914178 100644 --- a/Documentation/process/deprecated.rst +++ b/Documentation/process/deprecated.rst @@ -60,7 +60,8 @@ smaller allocation being made than the caller was expecting. Using those allocations could lead to linear overflows of heap memory and other misbehaviors. (One exception to this is literal values where the compiler can warn if they might overflow. Though using literals for arguments as -suggested below is also harmless.) +suggested below is also harmless. So, the preferred way in these cases is +to refactor the code to avoid the open-coded math idiom.) For example, do not use ``count * size`` as an argument, as in:: -- 2.25.1
