linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/8] kernfs: Add API to generate relative kernfs path

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]

Message-ID: <20151223160854.GF5003@mtj.duckdns.org>
Date:	Wed, 23 Dec 2015 11:08:54 -0500
From:	Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
To:	serge.hallyn@...ntu.com
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, adityakali@...gle.com,
	linux-api@...r.kernel.org, containers@...ts.linux-foundation.org,
	cgroups@...r.kernel.org, lxc-devel@...ts.linuxcontainers.org,
	akpm@...ux-foundation.org, ebiederm@...ssion.com,
	gregkh@...uxfoundation.org, lizefan@...wei.com, hannes@...xchg.org,
	"Serge E. Hallyn" <serge.hallyn@...onical.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/8] kernfs: Add API to generate relative kernfs path

Hello, Serge.

On Tue, Dec 22, 2015 at 10:23:22PM -0600, serge.hallyn@...ntu.com wrote:
> @@ -164,18 +286,39 @@ void pr_cont_kernfs_name(struct kernfs_node *kn)
>  void pr_cont_kernfs_path(struct kernfs_node *kn)
>  {
>  	unsigned long flags;
> -	char *p;
> +	char *p = NULL;
> +	int sz1, sz2;
>  
>  	spin_lock_irqsave(&kernfs_rename_lock, flags);
>  
> -	p = kernfs_path_locked(kn, kernfs_pr_cont_buf,
> -			       sizeof(kernfs_pr_cont_buf));
> -	if (p)
> -		pr_cont("%s", p);
> -	else
> -		pr_cont("<name too long>");
> +	sz1 = kernfs_path_from_node_locked(kn, NULL, kernfs_pr_cont_buf,
> +					   sizeof(kernfs_pr_cont_buf));
> +	if (sz1 < 0) {
> +		pr_cont("(error)");
> +		goto out;
> +	}
> +
> +	if (sz1 < sizeof(kernfs_pr_cont_buf)) {
> +		pr_cont("%s", kernfs_pr_cont_buf);
> +		goto out;
> +	}
> +
> +	p = kmalloc(sz1 + 1, GFP_NOFS);

We can't do GFP_NOFS allocation while holding a spinlock and we don't
want to do atomic allocation here either.  I think it'd be best to
keep using the static buffer.

Thanks.

-- 
tejun
--
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/