On Tue, Nov 3, 2020 at 5:14 AM Joe Perches <joe@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Mon, 2020-11-02 at 16:20 +0100, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote: > > From: Bartosz Golaszewski <bgolaszewski@xxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > > Andy brought to my attention the fact that users allocating an array of > > equally sized elements should check if the size multiplication doesn't > > overflow. This is why we have helpers like kmalloc_array(). > > > > However we don't have krealloc_array() equivalent and there are many > > users who do their own multiplication when calling krealloc() for arrays. > > > > This series provides krealloc_array() and uses it in a couple places. > > My concern about this is a possible assumption that __GFP_ZERO will > work, and as far as I know, it will not. > Yeah so I had this concern for devm_krealloc() and even sent a patch that extended it to honor __GFP_ZERO before I noticed that regular krealloc() silently ignores __GFP_ZERO. I'm not sure if this is on purpose. Maybe we should either make krealloc() honor __GFP_ZERO or explicitly state in its documentation that it ignores it? This concern isn't really related to this patch as such - it's more of a general krealloc() inconsistency. Bartosz
