lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2019]   [Jan]   [15]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe:[PATCH] x86/mm/mem_encrypt_identity : fix error useage to sizeof
On Mon, 7 Jan 2019, peng.hao2@zte.com.cn wrote:

> >> Fix error usage to sizeof. It should not use sizeof to pointer.
> >
> >.... because?
> >
> >The commit message needs to explain what the potential issue could be
> >and why it doesn't matter in this case.
> I see the definition of pte_t may be more than sizeof(unsigned long).
> So I think sizeof(pte_t) is safer.

What exactly is the difference between:

pte_t *p;

sizeof(*p)

and

sizeof(pte_t)

and what is safer about the latter?

Answer: No difference and nothing is safer because it's exactly the same.

In general we use sizeof(*p) simply because when the data type of p changes
you don't have to update the code, it just works and stays correct.

Thanks,

tglx

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2019-01-15 11:14    [W:0.046 / U:10.776 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site