Hi;
On 08/01/2018 02:37, Andrew Turner wrote:
On 7 Jan 2018, at 22:38, Ed Schouten <e...@freebsd.org> wrote:
Author: ed
Date: Sun Jan 7 22:38:45 2018
New Revision: 327684
URL: https://svnweb.freebsd.org/changeset/base/327684
Log:
Use mallocarray(9) in CloudABI kernel code where possible.
Submitted by: pfg@
Modified:
head/sys/compat/cloudabi32/cloudabi32_sock.c
head/sys/compat/cloudabi64/cloudabi64_sock.c
Modified: head/sys/compat/cloudabi32/cloudabi32_sock.c
==============================================================================
--- head/sys/compat/cloudabi32/cloudabi32_sock.c Sun Jan 7 22:21:07
2018 (r327683)
+++ head/sys/compat/cloudabi32/cloudabi32_sock.c Sun Jan 7 22:38:45
2018 (r327684)
@@ -60,7 +60,7 @@ cloudabi32_sys_sock_recv(struct thread *td,
/* Convert iovecs to native format. */
if (ri.ri_data_len > UIO_MAXIOV)
return (EINVAL);
- iov = malloc(ri.ri_data_len * sizeof(struct iovec),
+ iov = mallocarray(ri.ri_data_len, sizeof(struct iovec),
M_SOCKET, M_WAITOK);
Won’t this lead to a NULL pointer dereference on overflow? mallocarray can
return NULL even with M_WAITOK.
I think you are right: for the M_WAITOK case we should do the check
outside the malloc.
Compilers and static checkers should be giving out a warning since
mallocarray() has the __result_use_check attribute (is that working!?).
In the case of malloc(9) we should remove the attribute since we can by
using M_WAITOK.
And yes, this patch should be reverted.
Pedro.
_______________________________________________
svn-src-head@freebsd.org mailing list
https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/svn-src-head
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "svn-src-head-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
