[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <e5cb22d53c7c4ebea92443b8b6d86e88@AcuMS.aculab.com>
Date: Thu, 27 Aug 2020 15:58:02 +0000
From: David Laight <David.Laight@...LAB.COM>
To: 'Christoph Hellwig' <hch@....de>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
"Michael Ellerman" <mpe@...erman.id.au>,
"x86@...nel.org" <x86@...nel.org>
CC: "linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-arch@...r.kernel.org" <linux-arch@...r.kernel.org>,
"linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org" <linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org>,
Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH 01/10] fs: don't allow kernel reads and writes without
iter ops
From: Christoph Hellwig
> Sent: 27 August 2020 16:00
>
> Don't allow calling ->read or ->write with set_fs as a preparation for
> killing off set_fs. All the instances that we use kernel_read/write on
> are using the iter ops already.
>
> If a file has both the regular ->read/->write methods and the iter
> variants those could have different semantics for messed up enough
> drivers. Also fails the kernel access to them in that case.
Is there a real justification for that?
For system calls supplying both methods makes sense to avoid
the extra code paths for a simple read/write.
Any one stupid enough to make them behave differently gets
what they deserve.
David
-
Registered Address Lakeside, Bramley Road, Mount Farm, Milton Keynes, MK1 1PT, UK
Registration No: 1397386 (Wales)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists