linux-kernel - Re: [RFC][PATCH 1/6] Storing ipcs into IDRs

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-Id: <20070910130857.de90d8c5.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Date:	Mon, 10 Sep 2007 13:08:57 -0700
From:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To:	Nadia.Derbey@...l.net
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, matthltc@...ibm.com
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 1/6] Storing ipcs into IDRs

On Fri, 31 Aug 2007 13:24:46 +0200 Nadia.Derbey@...l.net wrote:

> [PATCH 01/06]
> 
> 
> This patch introduces ipcs storage into IDRs. The main changes are:
>   . This ipc_ids structure is changed: the entries array is changed into a
>     root idr structure.
>   . The grow_ary() routine is removed: it is not needed anymore when adding
>     an ipc structure, since we are now using the IDR facility.
>   . The ipc_rmid() routine interface is changed:
>        . there is no need for this routine to return the pointer passed in as
>          argument: it is now declared as a void
>        . since the id is now part of the kern_ipc_perm structure, no need to
>          have it as an argument to the routine
> 
> 

This is a large patch, and I have neither the time nor competence to review
it :(

I hope that someone will find the time to do a detailed review-n-test of
this code, because the IPC code is pretty touchy and isn't well-maintained,
as I'm sure you have noticed.

Meanwhile I'll queue the patches up for a bit of compile-time and runtime
testing, thanks.

> ...
>
> +		msq = (struct msg_queue *) ipc_findkey(&msg_ids(ns), key);

As a separate cleanup: the code casts the ipc_findkey to some outer struct
in all cases.  It would be nicer to convert this to container_of().  It'll
generate the same code, but it actually represents what the code is doing
and perhaps means that the code will continue to work if the `struct
kern_ipc_perm' is not at the start of the containing struct.

-
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/