linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] fadvise: avoid EINVAL if user input is valid

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:	Sat, 25 Feb 2012 22:56:21 +0000
From:	Pádraig Brady <P@...igBrady.com>
To:	Eric Wong <normalperson@...t.net>
CC:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, linux-mm@...ck.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] fadvise: avoid EINVAL if user input is valid

On 02/25/2012 02:27 AM, Eric Wong wrote:
> The kernel is not required to act on fadvise, so fail silently
> and ignore advice as long as it has a valid descriptor and
> parameters.
> 

> @@ -106,12 +105,8 @@ SYSCALL_DEFINE(fadvise64_64)(int fd, loff_t offset, loff_t len, int advice)
>  		nrpages = end_index - start_index + 1;
>  		if (!nrpages)
>  			nrpages = ~0UL;
> -		
> -		ret = force_page_cache_readahead(mapping, file,
> -				start_index,
> -				nrpages);
> -		if (ret > 0)
> -			ret = 0;
> +
> +		force_page_cache_readahead(mapping, file, start_index, nrpages);
>  		break;

This whole patch makes sense to me.
The above chunk might cause confusion in future,
if people wonder for a moment why the return is ignored.
Should you use cast with (void) like this to be explicit?

(void) force_page_cache_readahead(...);

cheers,
Pádraig.
--
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/