On Sat, Sep 25, 2021 at 04:34:55PM +0200, Len Baker wrote: > 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 arithmetic. > > So, clarify the preferred way in these cases. > > Suggested-by: Kees Cook <keescook@xxxxxxxxxxxx> > Signed-off-by: Len Baker <len.baker@xxxxxxx> This looks good to me. Reviewed-by: Gustavo A. R. Silva <gustavoars@xxxxxxxxxx> Thanks -- Gustavo > --- > Changelog v1 -> v2 > - Clarify the sentence by changing "keep <foo> out" with "avoid <foo>" > (Joe Perches). > > Changelog v2 -> v3 > - Reword the sentence to comunicate better (Jonathan Corbet). > > The previous version can be found here [1]. > > [1] https://lore.kernel.org/linux-hardening/20210829144716.2931-1-len.baker@xxxxxxx/ > > Documentation/process/deprecated.rst | 5 +++-- > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/Documentation/process/deprecated.rst b/Documentation/process/deprecated.rst > index 8ced754a5a0f..388cb19f5dbb 100644 > --- a/Documentation/process/deprecated.rst > +++ b/Documentation/process/deprecated.rst > @@ -59,8 +59,9 @@ risk of them overflowing. This could lead to values wrapping around and a > 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.) > +can warn if they might overflow. However, the preferred way in these > +cases is to refactor the code as suggested below to avoid the open-coded > +arithmetic.) > > For example, do not use ``count * size`` as an argument, as in:: > > -- > 2.25.1 >
