[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1524656669.21176.549.camel@linux.intel.com>
Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2018 14:44:29 +0300
From: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>
To: Petr Mladek <pmladek@...e.com>,
Rasmus Villemoes <linux@...musvillemoes.dk>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
"Tobin C . Harding" <me@...in.cc>, Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.cz>,
Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@...il.com>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky.work@...il.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 04/11] vsprintf: Do not check address of well-known
strings
On Wed, 2018-04-25 at 13:12 +0200, Petr Mladek wrote:
> We are going to check the address using probe_kernel_address(). It
> will
> be more expensive and it does not make sense for well known address.
>
> This patch splits the string() function. The variant without the check
> is then used on locations that handle string constants or strings
> defined
> as local variables.
>
> This patch does not change the existing behavior.
> - buf = string(buf, end, ",",
> str_spec);
> + buf = valid_string(buf, end,
> ",",
> + str_spec);
> - return string(buf, end, "(invalid
> address)", spec);
> + return valid_string(buf, end,
> + "(invalid
> address)", spec);
>
I wouldn't give a crap about over 80 in above two cases.
--
Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>
Intel Finland Oy
Powered by blists - more mailing lists