[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <550a55b8-d2a8-0de3-0bed-8f93a4513efe@huawei.com>
Date: Wed, 20 May 2020 09:14:08 +0800
From: Xiaoming Ni <nixiaoming@...wei.com>
To: Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@...ove.sakura.ne.jp>,
<keescook@...omium.org>
CC: <mcgrof@...nel.org>, <yzaikin@...gle.com>, <adobriyan@...il.com>,
<mingo@...nel.org>, <gpiccoli@...onical.com>, <rdna@...com>,
<patrick.bellasi@....com>, <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
<akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, <mhocko@...e.com>, <vbabka@...e.cz>,
<tglx@...utronix.de>, <peterz@...radead.org>,
<Jisheng.Zhang@...aptics.com>, <khlebnikov@...dex-team.ru>,
<bigeasy@...utronix.de>, <pmladek@...e.com>,
<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
<wangle6@...wei.com>, <alex.huangjianhui@...wei.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 2/4] sysctl: Move some boundary constants form sysctl.c
to sysctl_vals
On 2020/5/19 12:44, Tetsuo Handa wrote:
> On 2020/05/19 12:31, Xiaoming Ni wrote:
>> Some boundary (.extra1 .extra2) constants (E.g: neg_one two) in
>> sysctl.c are used in multiple features. Move these variables to
>> sysctl_vals to avoid adding duplicate variables when cleaning up
>> sysctls table.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Xiaoming Ni <nixiaoming@...wei.com>
>> Reviewed-by: Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
>
> I feel that it is use of
>
> void *extra1;
> void *extra2;
>
> in "struct ctl_table" that requires constant values indirection.
> Can't we get rid of sysctl_vals using some "union" like below?
>
> struct ctl_table {
> const char *procname; /* Text ID for /proc/sys, or zero */
> void *data;
> int maxlen;
> umode_t mode;
> struct ctl_table *child; /* Deprecated */
> proc_handler *proc_handler; /* Callback for text formatting */
> struct ctl_table_poll *poll;
> union {
> void *min_max_ptr[2];
> int min_max_int[2];
> long min_max_long[2];
> };
> } __randomize_layout;
>
> .
>
net/decnet/dn_dev.c:
static void dn_dev_sysctl_register(struct net_device *dev, struct
dn_dev_parms *parms)
{
struct dn_dev_sysctl_table *t;
int i;
char path[sizeof("net/decnet/conf/") + IFNAMSIZ];
t = kmemdup(&dn_dev_sysctl, sizeof(*t), GFP_KERNEL);
if (t == NULL)
return;
for(i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(t->dn_dev_vars) - 1; i++) {
long offset = (long)t->dn_dev_vars[i].data;
t->dn_dev_vars[i].data = ((char *)parms) + offset;
}
snprintf(path, sizeof(path), "net/decnet/conf/%s",
dev? dev->name : parms->name);
t->dn_dev_vars[0].extra1 = (void *)dev;
t->sysctl_header = register_net_sysctl(&init_net, path, t->dn_dev_vars);
if (t->sysctl_header == NULL)
kfree(t);
else
parms->sysctl = t;
}
A small amount of code is not used as a boundary value when using
extra1. This scenario may not be suitable for renaming to min_max_ptr.
Should we add const to extra1 extra2 ?
--- a/include/linux/sysctl.h
+++ b/include/linux/sysctl.h
@@ -124,8 +124,8 @@ struct ctl_table {
struct ctl_table *child; /* Deprecated */
proc_handler *proc_handler; /* Callback for text formatting */
struct ctl_table_poll *poll;
- void *extra1;
- void *extra2;
+ const void *extra1;
+ const void *extra2;
} __randomize_layout;
Thanks
Xiaoming Ni
Powered by blists - more mailing lists