[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20090306180559.9BD9.A69D9226@jp.fujitsu.com>
Date: Fri, 6 Mar 2009 18:09:00 +0900 (JST)
From: KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com>
To: Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@...il.com>
Cc: kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Li Zefan <lizf@...fujitsu.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-mm@...ck.org" <linux-mm@...ck.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH] kmemdup_from_user(): introduce
> On Fri, Mar 06, 2009 at 12:39:00AM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > On Fri, 06 Mar 2009 16:27:53 +0800 Li Zefan <lizf@...fujitsu.com> wrote:
> >
> > > > Let's not add wrapper for every two lines that happen to be used
> > > > together.
> > > >
> > >
> > > Why not if we have good reasons? And I don't think we can call this
> > > "happen to" if there are 250+ of them?
> >
> > The change is a good one. If a reviewer (me) sees it then you know the
> > code's all right and the review effort becomes less - all you need to check
> > is that the call site is using IS_ERR/PTR_ERR and isn't testing for
> > NULL. Less code, less chance for bugs.
> >
> > Plus it makes kernel text smaller.
> >
> > Yes, the name is a bit cumbersome.
>
> Some do NUL-termination afterwards and allocate "len + 1", but copy "len".
> Some don't care.
if subsystem want string data, it should use strndup_user().
memdump don't need to care NUL-termination
In addition, also I often review various mm code and patch, I also like
this change.
--
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