[lkml]   [2018]   [May]   [2]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [PATCH] staging: wilc1000: fix infinite loop and out-of-bounds access
On Wed, 2 May 2018 11:39:36 +0300
Dan Carpenter <> wrote:

> We're mainly discussing readability, right?
> To me when people use "int" that tells me as a reader that we don't
> need to think about the type. It's going to be a small number.
> Say you have data which the user can control, then it's super
> important to focus on the data types. We don't focus on it
> enough. There is some kind of idea that good developers should
> just be super focused on everything all the time, but I don't think
> humans can do it. So to me it's useful when the author tells me,
> "This an int type. It's fine. This is not critical."
> If you make request->n_ssids a u8 or u16, that isn't going to save
> any memory because the struct is padded. You'd also need to audit
> a bunch of code to make sure that we don't overflow the u16. If
> you wanted to overflow the int, you'd need to allocate several gigs
> of memory but kmalloc() is capped at KMALLOC_MAX_SIZE (4MB) so
> that's not possible. How many of these structs do we allocate? Is
> it really worth optimizing the heck out of it?
> There are times where want to be very deliberate with our types
> because we're dealing the large numbers, or user data or fast
> paths. But there are other times where int is fine...

As in this case, its fine to be of 'int' type.
So we can retain the current data type('int') for 'i' and 'slot_id'.
Thank you for sharing your insights,it was very helpful.


 \ /
  Last update: 2018-05-02 11:43    [W:0.031 / U:33.888 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site