linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 4/4] zram: introduce zram memory tracking

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:   Tue, 10 Apr 2018 09:03:05 +0900
From:   Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky.work@...il.com>
To:     Minchan Kim <minchan@...nel.org>
Cc:     Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky.work@...il.com>,
        Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 4/4] zram: introduce zram memory tracking

Hi Minchan,

On (04/09/18 14:54), Minchan Kim wrote:
> +static long long ns2usecs(u64 nsec)
> +{
> +	nsec += 500;
> +	do_div(nsec, 1000);
> +	return nsec;
> +}

Sorry, I don't quite understand "nsec += 500".

> +static ssize_t read_block_state(struct file *file, char __user *buf,
> +				size_t count, loff_t *ppos)
> +{
[..]
> +
> +	up_read(&zram->init_lock);
> +	copy_to_user(buf, kbuf, written);

drivers/block/zram/zram_drv.c: In function ‘read_block_state’:
drivers/block/zram/zram_drv.c:701:2: warning: ignoring return value of ‘copy_to_user’, declared with attribute warn_unused_result [-Wunused-result]
  copy_to_user(buf, kbuf, written);
  ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

[..]
> @@ -61,7 +61,9 @@ struct zram_table_entry {
>  		unsigned long element;
>  	};
>  	unsigned long value;
> +#ifdef	CONFIG_ZRAM_MEMORY_TRACKING

A silly nitpick, but since you are going to resend this one, could you
remove TAB between ifdef and CONFIG_ZRAM_MEMORY_TRACKING?

	-ss