On Wed, 18 Oct 2017, David Laight wrote:
> From: SF Markus Elfring > > >>>> Unpleasant consequences are possible in both cases. > > >> How much do you care to reduce the failure probability further? > > > > > > Zero. > > > > I am interested to improve the software situation a bit more here. > > There are probably better places to spend your time! > > If you want 'security' for kmalloc() then: > > #define KMALLOC_TYPE(flags) (type *)kmalloc(sizeof (type), flags) > #define KMALLOC(ptr, flags) *(ptr) = KMALLOC_TYPE(typeof *(ptr), flags) > > and change: > ptr = kmalloc(sizeof *ptr, flags); > to: > KMALLOC(&ptr, flags); > > But it is all churn for churn's sake. Please don't. Coccinelle won't find real problems with kmalloc any more if this is done. julia
