diff options
| author | Kees Cook <kees+treewide@kernel.org> | 2026-09-02 15:31:14 -0700 |
|---|---|---|
| committer | Kees Cook <kees@kernel.org> | 2026-09-04 21:37:00 -0700 |
| commit | 3a2c4d55e32ad65efebdb6de44eef3bfa08bb49d (patch) | |
| tree | c65086f9bdcd48c6360fb7cb4598bca084da1f32 /rust/helpers/build_assert.c | |
| download | linux-stable-3a2c4d55e32ad65efebdb6de44eef3bfa08bb49d.tar.gz linux-stable-3a2c4d55e32ad65efebdb6de44eef3bfa08bb49d.zip | |
treewide: refresh kmalloc_obj() conversionsgrafted
This is another run of the Coccinelle script for converting kmalloc()
family of allocations to kmalloc_obj() via the existing rules in
scripts/coccinelle/api/kmalloc_objs.cocci
This catches both the set of kmalloc() uses added since the first
kmalloc_obj() conversions in v7.0 and adds a large group missed in the
first pass due to Coccinelle not interacting well with the cleanup.h
scoped_...() family of macros[1]. I worked around this with spatch's
"--macro-file" argument to a file with all the scoped_...() macros mapped
to Coccinelle's YACFE_ITERATOR[2] as that was the closest viable control
flow indicator I could find.
Build tested allmodconfig on x86, arm64, arm, loongarch, mips, powerpc,
riscv, and s390 with no new warnings.
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/202609021314.8A9C0B8@keescook/ [1]
Link: https://github.com/coccinelle/coccinelle/blob/master/standard.h [2]
Signed-off-by: Kees Cook <kees+treewide@kernel.org>
Diffstat (limited to 'rust/helpers/build_assert.c')
| -rw-r--r-- | rust/helpers/build_assert.c | 25 |
1 files changed, 25 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/rust/helpers/build_assert.c b/rust/helpers/build_assert.c new file mode 100644 index 000000000..6a54b2680 --- /dev/null +++ b/rust/helpers/build_assert.c @@ -0,0 +1,25 @@ +// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 + +#include <linux/build_bug.h> + +/* + * `bindgen` binds the C `size_t` type as the Rust `usize` type, so we can + * use it in contexts where Rust expects a `usize` like slice (array) indices. + * `usize` is defined to be the same as C's `uintptr_t` type (can hold any + * pointer) but not necessarily the same as `size_t` (can hold the size of any + * single object). Most modern platforms use the same concrete integer type for + * both of them, but in case we find ourselves on a platform where + * that's not true, fail early instead of risking ABI or + * integer-overflow issues. + * + * If your platform fails this assertion, it means that you are in + * danger of integer-overflow bugs (even if you attempt to add + * `--no-size_t-is-usize`). It may be easiest to change the kernel ABI on + * your platform such that `size_t` matches `uintptr_t` (i.e., to increase + * `size_t`, because `uintptr_t` has to be at least as big as `size_t`). + */ +static_assert( + sizeof(size_t) == sizeof(uintptr_t) && + __alignof__(size_t) == __alignof__(uintptr_t), + "Rust code expects C `size_t` to match Rust `usize`" +); |
