On Mon, Mar 21, 2022 at 01:16:52PM +0100, Jakob Koschel wrote:
>
> > On 21. Mar 2022, at 10:26, hfreude <hfreude@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > On 2022-03-19 21:35, Jakob Koschel wrote:
> >> While the original code is valid, it is not the obvious choice for the
> >> sizeof() call and in preparation to limit the scope of the list iterator
> >> variable the sizeof should be changed to the size of the variable
> >> being allocated.
> >> Signed-off-by: Jakob Koschel <jakobkoschel@xxxxxxxxx>
> >> ---
> >> drivers/s390/crypto/zcrypt_card.c | 2 +-
> >> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >> diff --git a/drivers/s390/crypto/zcrypt_card.c
> >> b/drivers/s390/crypto/zcrypt_card.c
> >> index 3e259befd30a..fcbd537530e8 100644
> >> --- a/drivers/s390/crypto/zcrypt_card.c
> >> +++ b/drivers/s390/crypto/zcrypt_card.c
> >> @@ -90,7 +90,7 @@ static ssize_t online_store(struct device *dev,
> >> list_for_each_entry(zq, &zc->zqueues, list)
> >> maxzqs++;
> >> if (maxzqs > 0)
> >> - zq_uelist = kcalloc(maxzqs + 1, sizeof(zq), GFP_ATOMIC);
> >> + zq_uelist = kcalloc(maxzqs + 1, sizeof(*zq_uelist), GFP_ATOMIC);
> >> list_for_each_entry(zq, &zc->zqueues, list)
> >> if (zcrypt_queue_force_online(zq, online))
> >> if (zq_uelist) {
> >> base-commit: 34e047aa16c0123bbae8e2f6df33e5ecc1f56601
> >> --
> >> 2.25.1
> > Thanks Jakob, add my Reviewed-by: Harald Freudenberger <freude@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > Which way is this patch going to be integrated into the kernel ?
> > Usually I pick this and push it into s390 and on the next merge window it will
> > get merged into Linus Torvalds kernel tree.
> > However, sounds like you are about to clean up the kernel in preparation for the
> > changes related to the double linked list api. So maybe you have a patch series
> > which will go into the kernel by another way ?
> > Waiting for an answer, Thanks
> >
>
> CC'd Greg KH (in case he has some input) but my assumption is that this just goes
> the normal way through your s390 tree. Most of this cleanup is not in a hurry so
> getting it into the next merge window should be fine.
Normal way is fine.
thanks,
greg k-h
