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: <20201102142228.14949-1-brgl@bgdev.pl> <20201102142228.14949-2-brgl@bgdev.pl>
 <20201114154641.0258f4ee@archlinux> <X7ADFLwEpUHkTiT+@kroah.com>
In-Reply-To: <X7ADFLwEpUHkTiT+@kroah.com>
From:   Bartosz Golaszewski <bgolaszewski@baylibre.com>
Date:   Mon, 16 Nov 2020 11:18:03 +0100
Message-ID: <CAMpxmJUHiNqKNVDxaWLeDja6huR78u1Hp7JHF_aP5L_UgjYzbg@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/4] device: provide devm_krealloc_array()
To:     Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
Cc:     Jonathan Cameron <jic23@kernel.org>,
        Bartosz Golaszewski <brgl@bgdev.pl>,
        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>,
        arm-soc <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Precedence: bulk

On Sat, Nov 14, 2020 at 5:16 PM Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
>
> On Sat, Nov 14, 2020 at 03:46:41PM +0000, Jonathan Cameron wrote:
> > On Mon,  2 Nov 2020 15:22:25 +0100
> > Bartosz Golaszewski <brgl@bgdev.pl> wrote:
> >
> > > From: Bartosz Golaszewski <bgolaszewski@baylibre.com>
> > >
> > > When allocating an array of elements, users should check for
> > > multiplication overflow or preferably use one of the provided helpers
> > > like: devm_kmalloc_array().
> > >
> > > This provides devm_krealloc_array() for users who want to reallocate
> > > managed arrays.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Bartosz Golaszewski <bgolaszewski@baylibre.com>
> >
> > +CC Greg KH.
> >
> > As this is going into a very generic place I'd like a relevant ack.
> > That file is a bit of a wild west for acks, but Greg seems most
> > appropriate person.
> >
> > So Greg, any comments on this one?
>
> As there is only 1 user of this function in the patch series, you don't
> save any extra code space here, I don't think this is worth it.
>

It's worth it in that the overflow check before allocation doesn't
seem to belong in a driver IMO but is a general check that should live
in common code.

> We are seeing less and less gains from these new devm_* additions, and
> only more confusion and problems with them.  So perhaps don't add this?
> I don't think it is needed.
>

I think you're referring to the discussion on
devm_platform_ioremap_resource()? I would argue that consolidation of
common operations in helpers is rarely a bad thing but it's a
discussion for another thread.

I'm not too attached to this patch - if you think this should be
dropped then fine, but I don't see how the name devm_krealloc_array()
can confuse anyone.

Bartosz