[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <YFCsEGpi6Et3Bu3B@dhcp22.suse.cz>
Date: Tue, 16 Mar 2021 14:01:04 +0100
From: Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com>
To: Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>
Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@...il.com>,
Lee Duncan <lduncan@...e.com>, Chris Leech <cleech@...hat.com>,
Adam Nichols <adam@...mm-co.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-hardening@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] seq_file: Unconditionally use vmalloc for buffer
On Tue 16-03-21 12:43:12, Al Viro wrote:
[...]
> AFAICS, Kees wants to protect against ->show() instances stomping beyond
> the page size. What I don't get is what do you get from using seq_file
> if you insist on doing raw access to the buffer rather than using
> seq_printf() and friends. What's the point?
I do not think there is any and as you have said in other response we
should really make seq_get_buf internal thing to seq_file and be done
with that. If there is a missing functionality that users workaround by
abusing seq_get_buf then it should be added into seq_file interface.
--
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs
Powered by blists - more mailing lists