[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20200627071033.GC11854@lst.de>
Date: Sat, 27 Jun 2020 09:10:33 +0200
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
To: Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>, Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Luis Chamberlain <mcgrof@...nel.org>,
Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
Iurii Zaikin <yzaikin@...gle.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 8/9] fs: don't allow kernel reads and writes without
iter ops
On Fri, Jun 26, 2020 at 02:51:47PM +0100, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 26, 2020 at 09:58:35AM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > +static void warn_unsupported(struct file *file, const char *op)
> > +{
> > + char pathname[128], *path;
> > +
> > + path = file_path(file, pathname, sizeof(pathname));
> > + if (IS_ERR(path))
> > + path = "(unknown)";
> > + pr_warn_ratelimited(
> > + "kernel %s not supported for file %s (pid: %d comm: %.20s)\n",
> > + op, path, current->pid, current->comm);
> > +}
> > +
>
> how about just:
>
> pr_warn_ratelimited(
> "kernel %s not supported for file %pD4 (pid: %d comm: %.20s)\n",
> op, file, current->pid, current->comm);
Sure, we could use %pD for a few less line of code and a little less
typesafety. I'm not a huge fan of these custom, unchecked format
specifiers, but given that they exist we might a well use them.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists