Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/5] IB/qib: Adjust two size determinations in
 qib_init_pportdata()
To: Yuval Shaia <yuval.shaia@oracle.com>
Cc: linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org, Doug Ledford <dledford@redhat.com>,
        Hal Rosenstock <hal.rosenstock@gmail.com>,
        Mike Marciniszyn <infinipath@intel.com>,
        Sean Hefty <sean.hefty@intel.com>, LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org
References: <c16b18ac-287f-5faf-b79a-c86e2adfa22c@users.sourceforge.net>
 <b5bc4160-aace-b919-7fe2-a4742d03c4ba@users.sourceforge.net>
 <20170405143242.GB5006@yuval-lap>
From: SF Markus Elfring <elfring@users.sourceforge.net>
Message-ID: <523b0864-e655-ed1f-8fe5-5995e0b0bde1@users.sourceforge.net>
Date: Wed, 5 Apr 2017 17:04:35 +0200
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/52.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <20170405143242.GB5006@yuval-lap>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Language: en-GB
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1121
Lines: 32

>> @@ -270,13 +268,14 @@ int qib_init_pportdata(struct qib_pportdata *ppd, struct qib_devdata *dd,
>>  	if (!ppd->congestion_entries)
>>  		goto bail_1;
>>  
>> -	size = sizeof(struct cc_table_shadow);
>> -	ppd->ccti_entries_shadow = kzalloc(size, GFP_KERNEL);
>> +	ppd->ccti_entries_shadow = kzalloc(sizeof(*ppd->ccti_entries_shadow),
>> +					   GFP_KERNEL);
>>  	if (!ppd->ccti_entries_shadow)
>>  		goto bail_2;
>>  
>> -	size = sizeof(struct ib_cc_congestion_setting_attr);
>> -	ppd->congestion_entries_shadow = kzalloc(size, GFP_KERNEL);
>> +	ppd->congestion_entries_shadow = kzalloc(sizeof(*ppd
>> +							->congestion_entries_shadow),
>> +						 GFP_KERNEL);
> 
> Not related to this patch but is related to your patch-set - can you check
> the array allocations in lines 264 and 268?

Do you refer to source code places here which are affected by the update step
"[PATCH 4/5] IB/qib: Use kcalloc() in qib_init_pportdata()"?


> Besides that:
> Reviewed-by: Yuval Shaia <yuval.shaia@oracle.com>

Do you find the proposed change for the shown data types really acceptable
in these function calls?

Regards,
Markus