On Mon, Apr 28, 2025 at 01:09:46PM +0100, Tvrtko Ursulin wrote:
>
> On 26/04/2025 07:13, Kees Cook wrote:
> > In preparation for making the kmalloc family of allocators type aware,
> > we need to make sure that the returned type from the allocation matches
> > the type of the variable being assigned. (Before, the allocator would
> > always return "void *", which can be implicitly cast to any pointer type.)
> >
> > The assigned type is "struct i915_wa *". The returned type, while
> > technically matching, will be const qualified. As there is no general
> > way to remove const qualifiers, adjust the allocation type to match
> > the assignment.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Kees Cook <k...@kernel.org>
> > ---
> > Cc: Jani Nikula <jani.nik...@linux.intel.com>
> > Cc: Joonas Lahtinen <joonas.lahti...@linux.intel.com>
> > Cc: Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.v...@intel.com>
> > Cc: Tvrtko Ursulin <tursu...@ursulin.net>
> > Cc: David Airlie <airl...@gmail.com>
> > Cc: Simona Vetter <sim...@ffwll.ch>
> > Cc: Matt Roper <matthew.d.ro...@intel.com>
> > Cc: Gustavo Sousa <gustavo.so...@intel.com>
> > Cc: Andi Shyti <andi.sh...@linux.intel.com>
> > Cc: Lucas De Marchi <lucas.demar...@intel.com>
> > Cc: <intel-...@lists.freedesktop.org>
> > Cc: <dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org>
> > ---
> > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_workarounds.c | 2 +-
> > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_workarounds.c
> > b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_workarounds.c
> > index 116683ebe074..b37e400f74e5 100644
> > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_workarounds.c
> > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_workarounds.c
> > @@ -156,7 +156,7 @@ static void _wa_add(struct i915_wa_list *wal, const
> > struct i915_wa *wa)
> > if (IS_ALIGNED(wal->count, grow)) { /* Either uninitialized or full. */
> > struct i915_wa *list;
> > - list = kmalloc_array(ALIGN(wal->count + 1, grow), sizeof(*wa),
> > + list = kmalloc_array(ALIGN(wal->count + 1, grow), sizeof(*list),
>
> Will the sizeof stay, and if so, how will kmalloc be able to distinguish the
> type? Or we expect one more churn on the same line?
It is expected that when (if?) this happens, there will be a pre-rc1
treewide change to convert kmalloc to kmalloc_obj[1]. (So, yes, this
call would change, but it'll happen separately.)
-Kees
[1] Here's what v4 looked like:
https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20250315025852.it.568-k...@kernel.org/
v5 is still under development, but will look like this:
https://web.git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/kees/linux.git/log/?h=dev/v6.15-rc3%2b/alloc_obj/v5
--
Kees Cook
