lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2020]   [Sep]   [20]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH 01/14] pch_uart: drop double zeroing


On Sun, 20 Sep 2020, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:

> On Sun, Sep 20, 2020 at 01:26:13PM +0200, Julia Lawall wrote:
> > sg_init_table zeroes its first argument, so the allocation of that argument
> > doesn't have to.
> >
> > the semantic patch that makes this change is as follows:
> > (http://coccinelle.lip6.fr/)
> >
> > // <smpl>
> > @@
> > expression x,n,flags;
> > @@
> >
> > x =
> > - kcalloc
> > + kmalloc_array
> > (n,sizeof(struct scatterlist),flags)
> > ...
> > sg_init_table(x,n)
> > // </smpl>
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Julia Lawall <Julia.Lawall@inria.fr>
>
> It inits the first entry in the array, but what about all of the other
> ones? Is that "safe" to have uninitialized data in them like your
> change causes to happen?

Sorry, I don't follow. The complete code is:

priv->sg_tx_p = kcalloc(num, sizeof(struct scatterlist), GFP_ATOMIC);
if (!priv->sg_tx_p) {
dev_err(priv->port.dev, "%s:kzalloc Failed\n", __func__);
return 0;
}

sg_init_table(priv->sg_tx_p, num); /* Initialize SG table */

and the definition of sg_init_table is:

void sg_init_table(struct scatterlist *sgl, unsigned int nents)
{
memset(sgl, 0, sizeof(*sgl) * nents);
sg_init_marker(sgl, nents);
}

It looks to me like it zeroes all of the elements? The same file does
contain a call:

sg_init_table(&priv->sg_rx, 1);

But that's not the one associated with the patch.

julia

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2020-09-20 14:47    [W:2.020 / U:0.288 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site