lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Sun, 17 Apr 2011 20:00:17 -0700 (PDT) From: Hugh Dickins <hughd@...gle.com> To: Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.cz> cc: linux-mm@...ck.org, Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org> Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm: make expand_downwards symmetrical to expand_upwards On Fri, 14 Apr 2011, Michal Hocko wrote: > Hi, > the following patch is just a cleanup for better readability without any > functional changes. What do you think about it? > --- > From 71de71aaa725ee87459b3a256e8bb0af7de4abeb Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 > From: Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.cz> > Date: Fri, 15 Apr 2011 14:56:26 +0200 > Subject: [PATCH] mm: make expand_downwards symmetrical to expand_upwards > > Currently we have expand_upwards exported while expand_downwards is > accessible only via expand_stack. > > check_stack_guard_page is a nice example of the asymmetry. It uses > expand_stack for VM_GROWSDOWN while expand_upwards is called for > VM_GROWSUP case. Let's make this consistent and export expand_downwards > same way we do with expand_upwards. > > Signed-off-by: Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.cz> Yes, I've just been looking around here, and I like your symmetry. But two points: > --- > include/linux/mm.h | 2 ++ > mm/memory.c | 2 +- > mm/mmap.c | 2 +- > 3 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/include/linux/mm.h b/include/linux/mm.h > index 692dbae..765cf4e 100644 > --- a/include/linux/mm.h > +++ b/include/linux/mm.h > @@ -1498,8 +1498,10 @@ unsigned long ra_submit(struct file_ra_state *ra, > extern int expand_stack(struct vm_area_struct *vma, unsigned long address); > #if VM_GROWSUP > extern int expand_upwards(struct vm_area_struct *vma, unsigned long address); > + #define expand_downwards(vma, address) do { } while (0) I think this is wrong: doesn't the VM_GROWSUP case actually want a real expand_downwards() in addition to expand_upwards()? > #else > #define expand_upwards(vma, address) do { } while (0) > +extern int expand_downwards(struct vm_area_struct *vma, unsigned long address); > #endif > extern int expand_stack_downwards(struct vm_area_struct *vma, > unsigned long address); And if you're going for symmetry, wouldn't it be nice to add fs/exec.c to the patch and remove this silly expand_stack_downwards() wrapper? Hugh > diff --git a/mm/memory.c b/mm/memory.c > index ce22a25..f404fb6 100644 > --- a/mm/memory.c > +++ b/mm/memory.c > @@ -2969,7 +2969,7 @@ static inline int check_stack_guard_page(struct vm_area_struct *vma, unsigned lo > if (prev && prev->vm_end == address) > return prev->vm_flags & VM_GROWSDOWN ? 0 : -ENOMEM; > > - expand_stack(vma, address - PAGE_SIZE); > + expand_downwards(vma, address - PAGE_SIZE); > } > if ((vma->vm_flags & VM_GROWSUP) && address + PAGE_SIZE == vma->vm_end) { > struct vm_area_struct *next = vma->vm_next; > diff --git a/mm/mmap.c b/mm/mmap.c > index e27e0cf..6b2a817 100644 > --- a/mm/mmap.c > +++ b/mm/mmap.c > @@ -1782,7 +1782,7 @@ int expand_upwards(struct vm_area_struct *vma, unsigned long address) > /* > * vma is the first one with address < vma->vm_start. Have to extend vma. > */ > -static int expand_downwards(struct vm_area_struct *vma, > +int expand_downwards(struct vm_area_struct *vma, > unsigned long address) > { > int error; > -- > 1.7.4.1 -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists