linux-kernel - Re: [RFC][PATCH] sys_fallocate() system call

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]

Date:	Wed, 21 Mar 2007 14:35:02 -0700
From:	Chris Wedgwood <cw@...f.org>
To:	"Amit K. Arora" <aarora@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc:	Matthew Wilcox <matthew@....cx>,
	Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@...ibm.com>,
	linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org, xfs@....sgi.com,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, suparna@...ibm.com,
	cmm@...ibm.com, alex@...sterfs.com, suzuki@...ibm.com
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH] sys_fallocate() system call

I hate to comment at this late stage, especially on something that I
think is really a great idea (I did similar more complex, sys_blkalloc
with even more arguments time ago --- I'm glad given how complex this
thread has become I didn't post them now).

In the past there wasn't that much incentive to get this functionality
exposed because of various other issues (mmap + page dirty didn't
flush reliably) which are close to being resolve, so I think the
timing of this is really great....

On Wed, Mar 21, 2007 at 05:34:25PM +0530, Amit K. Arora wrote:

> As suggested by you and Russel, I have made this change to the
> patch.  Here is how it looks like now. Please let me know if anyone
> has concerns about passing arguments this way (breaking each
> "loff_t" into two "u32"s).

I really dislike breaking 64-bit args up unless it's necessary.  I
guess it doesn't really hurt, but it feels needlessly ugly.

> +	.long sys_fallocate		/* 320 */

> +/*
> + * fallocate() modes
> + */
> +#define FA_ALLOCATE	0x1
> +#define FA_DEALLOCATE	0x2
> +

given there are the only TWO modes right now, why not leave the
arguments as 64-bit sane and simply have two syscalls, one for each?
-
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/