linux-kernel - Re: [patch 1/3] fs: add an iovec iterator

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

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-Id: <A45C279B-2105-4FDA-9C14-E37158858176@oracle.com>
Date:	Fri, 9 Feb 2007 12:28:06 -0500
From:	Zach Brown <zach.brown@...cle.com>
To:	Nick Piggin <npiggin@...e.de>
Cc:	Nate Diller <nate.diller@...il.com>,
	Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
	Linux Filesystems <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Linux Kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [patch 1/3] fs: add an iovec iterator

> What I have there is not actually a full-blown file io descriptor,  
> because
> there is no file or offset. It is just an iovec iterator (so maybe  
> I should
> rename it to iov_iter, rather than iodesc).
>
> I think it might be a nice idea to keep this iov_iter as a standalone
> structure, and it could be embedded into a struct file_io?

Yeah, maybe.

I'm not sure we need something as generic as a "file_io" struct.

To recap, I've hoped for the expression of the state of an iovec  
array with a richer structure to avoid the multiple walks of the  
array at different parts of the kernel that previously only had  
access to the raw iovec * and size_t count.

Stuff like the alignment checks in __blockdev_direct_IO() and the  
pages_in_io accounting in direct_io_worker().

I imagined building up the state in this 'iodesc' structure as we  
first copied and verified the structure from userspace.  (say in  
rw_copy_check_uvector()).

If as we copied we, say, stored in the bits of the buffer and length  
fields then by the time we got to __blockdev_direct_IO() we'd just  
test the bits for misalignment instead of iterating over the array  
again.

It starts to get gross as some paths currently modify the kernel copy  
of the array as they process it :/.

- z
-
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/