linux-kernel - Re: [RFC v3 PATCH 3/5] mm: refactor do_munmap() to extract the common part

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20e2cd1a-7969-fa5e-4298-3bb1e6563acf@linux.alibaba.com>
Date:   Mon, 2 Jul 2018 11:02:28 -0700
From:   Yang Shi <yang.shi@...ux.alibaba.com>
To:     Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>
Cc:     willy@...radead.org, ldufour@...ux.vnet.ibm.com,
        akpm@...ux-foundation.org, peterz@...radead.org, mingo@...hat.com,
        acme@...nel.org, alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com,
        jolsa@...hat.com, namhyung@...nel.org, tglx@...utronix.de,
        hpa@...or.com, linux-mm@...ck.org, x86@...nel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC v3 PATCH 3/5] mm: refactor do_munmap() to extract the common
 part



On 7/2/18 10:58 AM, Michal Hocko wrote:
> On Mon 02-07-18 09:59:06, Yang Shi wrote:
>>
>> On 7/2/18 6:42 AM, Michal Hocko wrote:
>>> On Sat 30-06-18 06:39:43, Yang Shi wrote:
>>>> Introduces two new helper functions:
>>>>     * munmap_addr_sanity()
>>>>     * munmap_lookup_vma()
>>>>
>>>> They will be used by do_munmap() and the new do_munmap with zapping
>>>> large mapping early in the later patch.
>>>>
>>>> There is no functional change, just code refactor.
>>> There are whitespace changes which make the code much harder to review
>>> than necessary.
>>>> +static inline bool munmap_addr_sanity(unsigned long start, size_t len)
>>>>    {
>>>> -	unsigned long end;
>>>> -	struct vm_area_struct *vma, *prev, *last;
>>>> +	if ((offset_in_page(start)) || start > TASK_SIZE || len > TASK_SIZE - start)
>>>> +		return false;
>>>> -	if ((offset_in_page(start)) || start > TASK_SIZE || len > TASK_SIZE-start)
>>>> -		return -EINVAL;
>>> e.g. here.
>> Oh, yes. I did some coding style cleanup too.
> If you want to do some coding style cleanups make them a separate patch.
> The resulting diff would be much easier to review.

Sure, thanks

>