On Wed, May 01, 2024 at 01:21:42PM -0700, Kees Cook wrote: > On Tue, Apr 30, 2024 at 11:15:04AM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > > On Mon, Apr 29, 2024 at 07:40:58PM +0200, Erick Archer wrote: > > > This is an effort to get rid of all multiplications from allocation > > > functions in order to prevent integer overflows [1][2]. > > > > So personally I detest struct_size() because I can never remember wtf it > > does, whereas the code it replaces is simple and straight forward :/ > > Sure, new APIs can involved a learning curve. If we can all handle > container_of(), we can deal with struct_size(). :)
containre_of() is actually *much* shorter than typing it all out. Which is a benefit. struct_size() not so much. That's just obfuscation for obfuscation's sake.
