On Tue, Oct 27, 2020 at 12:04 PM Bartosz Golaszewski <brgl@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 27, 2020 at 10:33 AM Andy Shevchenko
> <andy.shevchenko@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, Oct 26, 2020 at 4:03 PM Bartosz Golaszewski <brgl@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > >
> > > From: Bartosz Golaszewski <bgolaszewski@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > >
> > > We now have devm_krealloc() in the kernel Use it indstead of calling
> > > kfree() and kcalloc() separately.
> >
> > Which is completely lawful when size > previous_size (I mean, the
> > additional patch you sent previously seems not related to this).
> >
>
> Sure but devm_krealloc() is cleaner and adds the benefit of resource management.
I meant devm_krealloc(). It should work in this case without your
additional "fix" patch.
> > > - kfree(xadc->data);
> > > - xadc->data = kcalloc(n, sizeof(*xadc->data), GFP_KERNEL);
> > > + xadc->data = devm_krealloc(indio_dev->dev.parent, xadc->data,
> > > + n * sizeof(*xadc->data),
> >
> > I think you need to use something from overflow.h instead of explicit
> > multiplication here.
> >
>
> Or maybe add devm_krealloc_array() which would perform the checks
> behind the scenes?
Maybe. But what to do in the cases when you have struct with flexible
arrays, like
struct foo {
...
type bar[];
};
?
And you do kzalloc(sizeof(foo)) followed by krealloc(). The above name
(krealloc_array) may be a bit ambiguous.
> > > + GFP_KERNEL | __GFP_ZERO);
--
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko
