On 2025/4/21 16:46, Su Hui wrote:
On 2025/4/21 16:32, Christophe JAILLET wrote:
Le 21/04/2025 à 09:43, Su Hui a écrit :
On 2025/4/21 15:10, Christophe JAILLET wrote:
Le 21/04/2025 à 07:51, Su Hui a écrit :
It's safer to use size_add() to replace open-coded aithmetic in
allocator
arguments, because size_add() can prevent possible overflow problem.
Signed-off-by: Su Hui <su...@nfschina.com>
---
include/crypto/aead.h | 3 ++-
include/crypto/akcipher.h | 4 +++-
include/crypto/kpp.h | 3 ++-
3 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/include/crypto/aead.h b/include/crypto/aead.h
index 0e8a41638678..cf212d28fe18 100644
--- a/include/crypto/aead.h
+++ b/include/crypto/aead.h
@@ -10,6 +10,7 @@
#include <linux/atomic.h>
#include <linux/container_of.h>
+#include <linux/overflow.h>
You could move this 1 line below, to keep alphabetical order.
And why do you say that it is redundant in your follow-up mail?
Thanks for your suggestion, I didn't notice this alphabetical order
at first :( .
Because I found that <linux/crypto.h> includes <linux/slab.h>, and
<linux/slab.h> includes <linux/overflow.h>, so this overflow.h is
redundant.
It is usually considered best practice to include what is used, and
not relying on indirect includes.
Should these others includes change one day, then some apparently
unrelated files will fails to built.
I already send a v2 patch, too fast for this v2 sending :(.
v2:
https://lore.kernel.org/all/20250421083116.1161805-1-su...@nfschina.com/
I agreed with 'include what is used'. So I guess v1 is enough and v2
maybe a wrong patchset.
Sorry for the noise.
Oh, I forget to keep alphabetical order, so v3 is needed if there is no
other suggestions.
