Thomas Zimmermann <[email protected]> writes: Hello Bhanu and Thomas,
> Hi > > Am 02.10.25 um 03:33 schrieb Bhanu Seshu Kumar Valluri: >> Use kmalloc_array to avoid potential overflow during dynamic size calculation >> inside kmalloc. >> >> Signed-off-by: Bhanu Seshu Kumar Valluri <[email protected]> >> --- The same patch was posted by another developer a couple of weeks ago and is now queued already in the drm-misc-next branch: https://cgit.freedesktop.org/drm/drm-misc/commit/?id=940dd88c5f5bdb1f3e19873a856a677ebada63a9 >> Note: >> Patch compiled successfully. >> No functionality change is intended. >> >> drivers/gpu/drm/solomon/ssd130x.c | 6 +++--- >> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/solomon/ssd130x.c >> b/drivers/gpu/drm/solomon/ssd130x.c >> index eec43d1a5595..8368f0ffbe1e 100644 >> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/solomon/ssd130x.c >> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/solomon/ssd130x.c >> @@ -1498,7 +1498,7 @@ static int ssd130x_crtc_atomic_check(struct drm_crtc >> *crtc, >> if (ret) >> return ret; >> >> - ssd130x_state->data_array = kmalloc(ssd130x->width * pages, GFP_KERNEL); >> + ssd130x_state->data_array = kmalloc_array(ssd130x->width, pages, >> GFP_KERNEL); > > The first parameter is the number of elements. The second parameter is > the size of an individual element. So the arguments should be swapped. > Same for the other changes. > > I know it's nitpicking, but who knows what it'll be good for. Fun fact > is that even kmalloc_array mixes up both parameters internally. > You are right. I didn't notice this subtlety when reviewing mentioned patch that pushed to drm-misc-next. > Best regards > Thomas > > -- Best regards, Javier Martinez Canillas Core Platforms Red Hat
