[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20100114144250.ebbe6601.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>
Date: Thu, 14 Jan 2010 14:42:50 +0900
From: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com>
To: Al Viro <viro@...IV.linux.org.uk>
Cc: "Wu, Fengguang" <fengguang.wu@...el.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@...ibm.com>,
Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>,
Nick Piggin <npiggin@...e.de>,
Hugh Dickins <hugh.dickins@...cali.co.uk>,
Linux Memory Management List <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/8] vfs: fix too big f_pos handling
On Thu, 14 Jan 2010 05:13:08 +0000
Al Viro <viro@...IV.linux.org.uk> wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 13, 2010 at 10:09:56PM +0800, Wu, Fengguang wrote:
> > From: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com>
> >
> > Now, rw_verify_area() checsk f_pos is negative or not. And if
> > negative, returns -EINVAL.
> >
> > But, some special files as /dev/(k)mem and /proc/<pid>/mem etc..
> > has negative offsets. And we can't do any access via read/write
> > to the file(device).
> >
> > This patch introduce a flag S_VERYBIG and allow negative file
> > offsets.
>
> Ehh... FMODE_NEG_OFFSET in file->f_mode, perhaps?
>
Any method is okay for me.
I was just not sure where I could modify without problem.
If modifing f_mode is allowed, I'll write new version.
Thank you for advice.
I'm sorry that I don't have enough time this week. So, I'll try next week.
I think dropping this patch itself has no big influence to this patch set.
(but debug will be harder ;)
Thanks,
-Kame
--
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