linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/5] vfs: create a generic checking function for FS_IOC

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: <20190626154302.GA31445@infradead.org>
Date:   Wed, 26 Jun 2019 08:43:02 -0700
From:   Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
To:     "Darrick J. Wong" <darrick.wong@...cle.com>
Cc:     Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>, matthew.garrett@...ula.com,
        yuchao0@...wei.com, tytso@....edu, shaggy@...nel.org,
        ard.biesheuvel@...aro.org, josef@...icpanda.com, hch@...radead.org,
        clm@...com, adilger.kernel@...ger.ca, jk@...abs.org, jack@...e.com,
        dsterba@...e.com, jaegeuk@...nel.org, cluster-devel@...hat.com,
        jfs-discussion@...ts.sourceforge.net, linux-efi@...r.kernel.org,
        Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>, reiserfs-devel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-f2fs-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net, linux-xfs@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-nilfs@...r.kernel.org, linux-mtd@...ts.infradead.org,
        ocfs2-devel@....oracle.com, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org, linux-btrfs@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/5] vfs: create a generic checking function for
 FS_IOC_FSSETXATTR

On Wed, Jun 26, 2019 at 08:35:42AM -0700, Darrick J. Wong wrote:
> > static inline void simple_fill_fsxattr(struct fsxattr *fa, unsigned xflags)
> > {
> > 	memset(fa, 0, sizeof(*fa));
> > 	fa->fsx_xflags = xflags;
> > }
> > 
> > and let the compiler optimize the crap out?
> 
> The v2 series used to do that, but Christoph complained that having a
> helper for a two-line memset and initialization was silly[1] so now we
> have this version.
> 
> I don't mind reinstating it as a static inline helper, but I'd like some
> input from any of the btrfs developers (or you, Al) about which form is
> preferred.

I complained having that helper in btrfs.  I think Al wants a generic
one, which at least makes a little more sense.

That being said I wonder if we should lift these attr ioctls to
file op methods and deal with all that crap in VFS code instead of
having all those duplicated ioctl parsers.