linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 1/4] kernfs: kvmalloc xattr value instead of kmalloc

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: <C17G1V88F2XD.EQFO8E8QX1YO@dlxu-fedora-R90QNFJV>
Date:   Tue, 10 Mar 2020 13:40:08 -0700
From:   "Daniel Xu" <dxu@...uu.xyz>
To:     "Shakeel Butt" <shakeelb@...gle.com>
Cc:     "Cgroups" <cgroups@...r.kernel.org>, "Tejun Heo" <tj@...nel.org>,
        "Li Zefan" <lizefan@...wei.com>,
        "Johannes Weiner" <hannes@...xchg.org>,
        "LKML" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "Greg Kroah-Hartman" <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        "Kernel Team" <kernel-team@...com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/4] kernfs: kvmalloc xattr value instead of kmalloc

Hi Shakeel,

On Tue Mar 10, 2020 at 12:40 PM, Shakeel Butt wrote:
> Hi Daniel,
>
> 
> On Thu, Mar 5, 2020 at 1:16 PM Daniel Xu <dxu@...uu.xyz> wrote:
> >
> > It's not really necessary to have contiguous physical memory for xattr
> > values. We no longer need to worry about higher order allocations
> > failing with kvmalloc, especially because the xattr size limit is at
> > 64K.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Daniel Xu <dxu@...uu.xyz>
>
> 
> The patch looks fine to me. However the commit message is too cryptic
> i.e. hard to get the motivation behind the change.
>

Thanks for taking a look. The real reason I did it was because Tejun
said so :).

Tejun, is there a larger reason?


Thanks,
Daniel