[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20150331155756.GA12842@kroah.com>
Date: Tue, 31 Mar 2015 17:57:56 +0200
From: "gregkh@...uxfoundation.org" <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To: Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@...6.fr>
Cc: "Dhere, Chaitanya (C.)" <cvijaydh@...teon.com>,
"oleg.drokin@...el.com" <oleg.drokin@...el.com>,
"andreas.dilger@...el.com" <andreas.dilger@...el.com>,
"viro@...iv.linux.org.uk" <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
"jinshan.xiong@...el.com" <jinshan.xiong@...el.com>,
"aybuke.147@...il.com" <aybuke.147@...il.com>,
"john.hammond@...el.com" <john.hammond@...el.com>,
"HPDD-discuss@...ts.01.org" <HPDD-discuss@...1.01.org>,
"devel@...verdev.osuosl.org" <devel@...verdev.osuosl.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] staging: lustre: replace kzalloc with copy_from_user
with memdup_user
On Tue, Mar 31, 2015 at 05:15:23PM +0200, Julia Lawall wrote:
> On Tue, 31 Mar 2015, Dhere, Chaitanya (C.) wrote:
>
> > This patch replaces kzalloc and copy_from_user with memdup_user call
> > This change was detected with coccinelle tool
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Chaitanya Dhere <cvijaydh@...teon.com>
> > ---
> > drivers/staging/lustre/lustre/llite/file.c | 11 +++--------
> > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/staging/lustre/lustre/llite/file.c b/drivers/staging/lustre/lustre/llite/file.c
> > index 85e74d1..85b5567 100644
> > --- a/drivers/staging/lustre/lustre/llite/file.c
> > +++ b/drivers/staging/lustre/lustre/llite/file.c
> > @@ -2368,14 +2368,9 @@ ll_file_ioctl(struct file *file, unsigned int cmd, unsigned long arg)
> > struct hsm_state_set *hss;
> > int rc;
> >
> > - hss = kzalloc(sizeof(*hss), GFP_NOFS);
> > - if (!hss)
> > - return -ENOMEM;
> > -
> > - if (copy_from_user(hss, (char *)arg, sizeof(*hss))) {
> > - OBD_FREE_PTR(hss);
> > - return -EFAULT;
> > - }
> > + hss = memdup_user((char *)arg, sizeof(*hss));
>
> memdup_user will use the flag GFP_KERNEL, ie (__GFP_WAIT | __GFP_IO |
> __GFP_FS), rather than the flag GFP_NOFS, ie (__GFP_WAIT | __GFP_IO), that
> is specified. I don't know if this is a problem here.
Yes, this is a filesystem, so this can't be changed, as we can't have
the allocation go out and ask for more filesystem accesses in the middle
of trying to do a filesystem access :)
thanks,
greg k-h
--
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