linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH rdma-next v1 1/2] lib/scatterlist: Fix wrong update of orig

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: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Wed, 30 Jun 2021 09:29:51 +0300
From:   Leon Romanovsky <leon@...nel.org>
To:     Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
Cc:     Doug Ledford <dledford@...hat.com>,
        Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...dia.com>,
        Maor Gottlieb <maorg@...dia.com>,
        Dennis Dalessandro <dennis.dalessandro@...nelisnetworks.com>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org,
        Mike Marciniszyn <mike.marciniszyn@...nelisnetworks.com>,
        Yishai Hadas <yishaih@...dia.com>,
        Zhu Yanjun <zyjzyj2000@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH rdma-next v1 1/2] lib/scatterlist: Fix wrong update of
 orig_nents

On Wed, Jun 30, 2021 at 06:59:11AM +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 29, 2021 at 11:40:01AM +0300, Leon Romanovsky wrote:
> > 2. Add a new field total_nents to reflect the total number of entries
> >    in the table. This is required for the release flow (sg_free_table).
> >    This filed should be used internally only by scatterlist.
> 
> No, please don't bloat the common structure.

Somehow we need to store that total_nents value and our internal
proposal was to wrap sg_table with another private structure that is
visible in lib/scatterlist.c only.

Something like that:
struct sg_table_private {
  struct sg_table table;
  unsigned int total_nents;
};

But it looks awkward.

> 
> > +	/* The fields below should be used internally only by
> > +	 * scatterlist implementation.
> > +	 */
> 
> And this is not the way kernel comments work.

It is netdev style.

Thanks