Re: [PATCH] tuners: tda8290: reduce stack usage with kasan

[Arnd Bergmann]

On Mon, Dec 11, 2017 at 10:17 PM, Michael Ira Krufky
<mkrufky@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 11, 2017 at 2:34 PM, Joe Perches <joe@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> On Mon, 2017-12-11 at 13:06 +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
>>> With CONFIG_KASAN enabled, we get a relatively large stack frame in one function
>>>
>>> drivers/media/tuners/tda8290.c: In function 'tda8290_set_params':
>>> drivers/media/tuners/tda8290.c:310:1: warning: the frame size of 1520 bytes is larger than 1024 bytes [-Wframe-larger-than=]
>>>
>>> With CONFIG_KASAN_EXTRA this goes up to
>>>
>>> drivers/media/tuners/tda8290.c: In function 'tda8290_set_params':
>>> drivers/media/tuners/tda8290.c:310:1: error: the frame size of 3200 bytes is larger than 3072 bytes [-Werror=frame-larger-than=]
>>>
>>> We can significantly reduce this by marking local arrays as 'static const', and
>>> this should result in better compiled code for everyone.
>> []
>>> diff --git a/drivers/media/tuners/tda8290.c b/drivers/media/tuners/tda8290.c
>> []
>>> @@ -63,8 +63,8 @@ static int tda8290_i2c_bridge(struct dvb_frontend *fe, int close)
>>>  {
>>>       struct tda8290_priv *priv = fe->analog_demod_priv;
>>>
>>> -     unsigned char  enable[2] = { 0x21, 0xC0 };
>>> -     unsigned char disable[2] = { 0x21, 0x00 };
>>> +     static unsigned char  enable[2] = { 0x21, 0xC0 };
>>> +     static unsigned char disable[2] = { 0x21, 0x00 };
>>
>> Doesn't match commit message.
>>
>> static const or just static?
>>
>>> @@ -84,9 +84,9 @@ static int tda8295_i2c_bridge(struct dvb_frontend *fe, int close)
>>>  {
>>>       struct tda8290_priv *priv = fe->analog_demod_priv;
>>>
>>> -     unsigned char  enable[2] = { 0x45, 0xc1 };
>>> -     unsigned char disable[2] = { 0x46, 0x00 };
>>> -     unsigned char buf[3] = { 0x45, 0x01, 0x00 };
>>> +     static unsigned char  enable[2] = { 0x45, 0xc1 };
>>> +     static unsigned char disable[2] = { 0x46, 0x00 };
>>
>> etc.
>>
>>
>
>
> Joe is correct - they can be CONSTified. My bad -- a lot of the code I
> wrote many years ago has this problem -- I wasn't so stack-conscious
> back then.
>
> The bytes in `enable` / `disable` don't get changed, but they may be
> copied to another byte array that does get changed.  If would be best
> to make these `static const`

Right. This was an older patch of mine that I picked up again
after running into a warning that I had been ignoring for a while,
and I didn't double-check the message.

I actually thought about marking them 'const' here before sending
(without noticing the changelog text) and then ran into what must
have led me to drop the 'const' originally: tuner_i2c_xfer_send()
takes a non-const pointer. This can be fixed but it requires
an ugly cast:

diff --git a/drivers/media/tuners/tuner-i2c.h b/drivers/media/tuners/tuner-i2c.h
index bda67a5a76f2..809466eec780 100644
--- a/drivers/media/tuners/tuner-i2c.h
+++ b/drivers/media/tuners/tuner-i2c.h
@@ -34,10 +34,10 @@ struct tuner_i2c_props {
 };

 static inline int tuner_i2c_xfer_send(struct tuner_i2c_props *props,
-                                     unsigned char *buf, int len)
+                                     const unsigned char *buf, int len)
 {
        struct i2c_msg msg = { .addr = props->addr, .flags = 0,
-                              .buf = buf, .len = len };
+                              .buf = (unsigned char *)buf, .len = len };
        int ret = i2c_transfer(props->adap, &msg, 1);

        return (ret == 1) ? len : ret;
@@ -54,11 +54,11 @@ static inline int tuner_i2c_xfer_recv(struct
tuner_i2c_props *props,
 }

 static inline int tuner_i2c_xfer_send_recv(struct tuner_i2c_props *props,
-                                          unsigned char *obuf, int olen,
+                                          const unsigned char *obuf, int olen,
                                           unsigned char *ibuf, int ilen)
 {
        struct i2c_msg msg[2] = { { .addr = props->addr, .flags = 0,
-                                   .buf = obuf, .len = olen },
+                                   .buf = (unsigned char *)obuf, .len = olen },
                                  { .addr = props->addr, .flags = I2C_M_RD,
                                    .buf = ibuf, .len = ilen } };
        int ret = i2c_transfer(props->adap, msg, 2);

Should I submit it as a two-patch series with that added in, or update
the changelog to not mention 'const' instead?

       Arnd