linux-kernel - Re: Interface for the new 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:	Thu, 29 Mar 2007 20:05:24 +0200 (MEST)
From:	Jan Engelhardt <jengelh@...ux01.gwdg.de>
To:	"linux-os (Dick Johnson)" <linux-os@...logic.com>
cc:	"Amit K. Arora" <aarora@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>, torvalds@...l.org,
	akpm@...ux-foundation.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org,
	xfs@....sgi.com, suparna@...ibm.com, cmm@...ibm.com
Subject: Re: Interface for the new fallocate() system call

On Mar 29 2007 13:18, linux-os (Dick Johnson) wrote:
>
>I think it's always better to put only a pointer on the stack as
>above.

I have to disagree, since wrapping it into a struct and copying the struct
in kernelspace from userspace requires more code. Pointers only become
useful at 3 (rarely) or 4 (yeah, more likely) and 5+ (definitely)
arguments, (3) see above about copying, (4) middle thing and (5) tons of
arguments like mmap() should be wrapped up... for simplicity of dealing
with it later.

Jan
-- 
-
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/