Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20201026133609.24262-1-brgl@bgdev.pl> <20201026133609.24262-3-brgl@bgdev.pl>
 <CAHp75VfeBXszvhrz_YgtX6=HY=TJJXhWdTSTC1=S4UV2cOkJvA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAMRc=Mf33JMNMT1vcrHx33QK7wj_gPY-CPaPUsqtON8X8S-JtQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAHp75Vf-z8yba-QX4G51PRkMV9VKAczd_79sma96zHRf+bMD2w@mail.gmail.com> <CAMpxmJUPsz3o8pDAU9e5x1gD-yGf5Fym2DgYnfpCKEFTj9DSYw@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAMpxmJUPsz3o8pDAU9e5x1gD-yGf5Fym2DgYnfpCKEFTj9DSYw@mail.gmail.com>
From:   Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@gmail.com>
Date:   Tue, 27 Oct 2020 13:18:36 +0200
Message-ID: <CAHp75VdKXJgn3ZNDit6Drz8xyTatLeg8M9+gkmtBFeaLFTn51w@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/5] iio: adc: xilinx: use devm_krealloc() instead of
 kfree() + kcalloc()
To:     Bartosz Golaszewski <bgolaszewski@baylibre.com>
Cc:     Bartosz Golaszewski <brgl@bgdev.pl>,
        Jonathan Cameron <jic23@kernel.org>,
        Lars-Peter Clausen <lars@metafoo.de>,
        Peter Meerwald-Stadler <pmeerw@pmeerw.net>,
        Michal Simek <michal.simek@xilinx.com>,
        linux-iio <linux-iio@vger.kernel.org>,
        linux-arm Mailing List <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Precedence: bulk

On Tue, Oct 27, 2020 at 12:40 PM Bartosz Golaszewski
<bgolaszewski@baylibre.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 27, 2020 at 11:29 AM Andy Shevchenko
> <andy.shevchenko@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Tue, Oct 27, 2020 at 12:04 PM Bartosz Golaszewski <brgl@bgdev.pl> wrote:
> > > On Tue, Oct 27, 2020 at 10:33 AM Andy Shevchenko
> > > <andy.shevchenko@gmail.com> wrote:

...

> > I meant devm_krealloc(). It should work in this case without your
> > additional "fix" patch.

> I know, this is why I sent the fix separately. The fix is still
> correct on its own.

My point is it's not needed. At all.
It will actually make a regression. But this is for discussion in that thread.

...

> > > Or maybe add devm_krealloc_array() which would perform the checks
> > > behind the scenes?
> >
> > Maybe. But what to do in the cases when you have struct with flexible
> > arrays, like
> > struct foo {
> > ...
> >  type bar[];
> > };
> >
> > ?
>
> Just use regular devm_krealloc() with struct_size()?
>
> >
> > And you do kzalloc(sizeof(foo)) followed by krealloc(). The above name
> > (krealloc_array) may be a bit ambiguous.
>
> But devm_krealloc_array() would only be useful for memory allocated by
> kmalloc_array() or kcalloc(). I don't see what's your point.

Naming ambiguity.
Here I'm not against it. If you think it's a good idea, go for it!

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko