On Tue, May 30, 2023 at 4:00 PM Kees Cook <keescook@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Tue, May 23, 2023 at 10:43:52AM -0700, Song Liu wrote: > > On Mon, May 22, 2023 at 2:21 PM Kees Cook <keescook@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > > Replace old-style 1-element array of "dev" in struct stripe_head with > > > modern C99 flexible array. In the future, we can additionally annotate > > > it with the run-time size, found in the "disks" member. > > > > > > Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > Cc: linux-raid@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > > > Signed-off-by: Kees Cook <keescook@xxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > --- > > > It looks like this memory calculation: > > > > > > memory = conf->min_nr_stripes * (sizeof(struct stripe_head) + > > > max_disks * ((sizeof(struct bio) + PAGE_SIZE))) / 1024; > > > > > > ... was already buggy (i.e. it included the single "dev" bytes in the > > > result). However, I'm not entirely sure if that is the right analysis, > > > since "dev" is not related to struct bio nor PAGE_SIZE? > > > > > > v1: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20230517233313.never.130-kees@xxxxxxxxxx/ > > > v2: use new struct_size_t() helper from > > > https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20230522211810.never.421-kees@xxxxxxxxxx/ > > > > LTGM. Thanks! > > Thanks! > > > I will hold this for a while until struct_size_t() merged. > > Since my tree will introduce struct_size_t(), I will just carry it > there. Sounds good! You can add Acked-by: Song Liu <song@xxxxxxxxxx> Thanks, Song
