Date: Sun, 1 Jul 2018 11:22:36 +0200 From: SF Markus Elfring <elfring@...rs.sourceforge.net> To: Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@...6.fr>, Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>, linux-mm@...ck.org, kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com Cc: kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>, Rasmus Villemoes <linux@...musvillemoes.dk>, Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org> Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 12/16] treewide: Use array_size() for kmalloc()-family >> * The repetition of such a constraint in subsequent SmPL rules could be avoided >> if inheritance will be used for this metavariable. > > This is quite incorrect. I suggest to consider additional software design options. > Inheritance is only possible when a match of the previous rule has succeeded. I agree with this information. > If a rule never applies in a given file, the rules that inherit from it > won't apply either. I would like to point the possibility out to specify a source code search which will find interesting function calls at least by an inital SmPL rule. > Furthermore, what is inherited is the value, not the constraint. This technical detail can be fine. > If the original binding of alloc only ever matches kmalloc, > then the inherited references will only match kmalloc too. Can the desired search pattern be extended in significant ways? Regards, Markus
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use? Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia and check out these guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.