Commit 98b160c8 authored by Len Baker's avatar Len Baker Committed by Gustavo A. R. Silva

writeback: prefer struct_size over open coded arithmetic

As noted in the "Deprecated Interfaces, Language Features, Attributes,
and Conventions" documentation [1], size calculations (especially
multiplication) should not be performed in memory allocator (or similar)
function arguments due to the 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.

In this case these are not actually dynamic sizes: all the operands
involved in the calculation are constant values. However it is better to
refactor them anyway, just to keep the open-coded math idiom out of
code.

So, use the struct_size() helper to do the arithmetic instead of the
argument "size + count * size" in the kzalloc() functions.

This code was detected with the help of Coccinelle and audited and fixed
manually.

[1] https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/process/deprecated.html#open-coded-arithmetic-in-allocator-argumentsSigned-off-by: default avatarLen Baker <len.baker@gmx.com>
Reviewed-by: default avatarGustavo A. R. Silva <gustavoars@kernel.org>
Reviewed-by: default avatarJan Kara <jack@suse.cz>
Signed-off-by: default avatarGustavo A. R. Silva <gustavoars@kernel.org>
parent c2e4e3b7
......@@ -566,7 +566,7 @@ static void inode_switch_wbs(struct inode *inode, int new_wb_id)
if (atomic_read(&isw_nr_in_flight) > WB_FRN_MAX_IN_FLIGHT)
return;
isw = kzalloc(sizeof(*isw) + 2 * sizeof(struct inode *), GFP_ATOMIC);
isw = kzalloc(struct_size(isw, inodes, 2), GFP_ATOMIC);
if (!isw)
return;
......@@ -624,8 +624,8 @@ bool cleanup_offline_cgwb(struct bdi_writeback *wb)
int nr;
bool restart = false;
isw = kzalloc(sizeof(*isw) + WB_MAX_INODES_PER_ISW *
sizeof(struct inode *), GFP_KERNEL);
isw = kzalloc(struct_size(isw, inodes, WB_MAX_INODES_PER_ISW),
GFP_KERNEL);
if (!isw)
return restart;
......
Markdown is supported
0%
or
You are about to add 0 people to the discussion. Proceed with caution.
Finish editing this message first!
Please register or to comment