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;
Date:   Sun, 29 Aug 2021 16:32:00 +0200
From:   Len Baker <len.baker@gmx.com>
To:     Joe Perches <joe@perches.com>
Cc:     Len Baker <len.baker@gmx.com>, Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>,
        Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>,
        "Gustavo A. R. Silva" <gustavoars@kernel.org>,
        linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-hardening@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] docs: deprecated.rst: Clarify open-coded arithmetic with
 literals
Message-ID: <20210829143200.GA2185@titan>
References: <20210827171226.2938-1-len.baker@gmx.com>
 <bd7487c725e15b0c20612a44ecf301637a60c157.camel@perches.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
In-Reply-To: <bd7487c725e15b0c20612a44ecf301637a60c157.camel@perches.com>
Precedence: bulk

Hi,

On Fri, Aug 27, 2021 at 12:06:18PM -0700, Joe Perches wrote:
> On Fri, 2021-08-27 at 19:12 +0200, Len Baker wrote:
> > Although using literals for size calculation in allocator arguments ma=
y
> > be harmless due to compiler warnings in case of overflows, it is bette=
r
> > to refactor the code to avoid the use of open-coded math idiom.
> >
> > So, clarify the preferred way in these cases.
> []
> > diff --git a/Documentation/process/deprecated.rst b/Documentation/proc=
ess/deprecated.rst
> []
> > @@ -60,7 +60,8 @@ smaller allocation being made than the caller was ex=
pecting. Using those
> > =A0allocations could lead to linear overflows of heap memory and other
> > =A0misbehaviors. (One exception to this is literal values where the co=
mpiler
> > =A0can warn if they might overflow. Though using literals for argument=
s as
> > -suggested below is also harmless.)
> > +suggested below is also harmless. So, the preferred way in these case=
s is
> > +to refactor the code to keep the open-coded math idiom out.)
>
> wordsmithing trivia:
>
> 'keep <foo> out' is difficult to parse as 'keep' is generally a positive
> word but its meaning is later reversed with out.
>
> 'avoid <foo>' maybe be better phrasing.
>
Understood. I will do this change and I will send a new version.
Thanks for the review.

Regards,
Len