[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1790890.atdPhlSkOF@leap>
Date: Tue, 26 Apr 2022 22:19:57 +0200
From: "Fabio M. De Francesco" <fmdefrancesco@...il.com>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: Ira Weiny <ira.weiny@...el.com>,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
"Matthew Wilcox (Oracle)" <willy@...radead.org>,
Peter Collingbourne <pcc@...gle.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm/highmem: VM_BUG_ON() if offset + len > PAGE_SIZE
On martedì 26 aprile 2022 21:34:12 CEST Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Tue, 26 Apr 2022 21:30:20 +0200 "Fabio M. De Francesco"
<fmdefrancesco@...il.com> wrote:
>
> > Add VM_BUG_ON() bounds checking to make sure that, if "offset + len>
> > PAGE_SIZE", memset() does not corrupt data in adjacent pages.
> >
>
> hm, why? To match all the other functions in there?
>
> I suppose that's logical. Or we could just delete all the other
> VM_BUG_ON()s. Have any of them proven to be at all useful?
>
I am not so sure about it being so useful. I just noted that memzero_page()
is the only function of that family that is implemented with no
VM_BUG_ON(). I have no actual proofs of usefulness :(
This is why yesterday I sent an "RFC Patch" (please see
https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20220424104806.25396-1-fmdefrancesco@gmail.com/
Soon after sending it I thought that VM_WARN_ON_ONCE() could have been
better suited, but Ira Weiny wrote to use VM_BUG_ON() for consistency.
Now I could either delete all other VM_BUG_ON() or replace them with
VM_WARN_ON_ONCE() (or some other macro).
Ah, a third solution might be to leave highmem.h as it is now :)
What do you prefer?
Thanks,
Fabio
Powered by blists - more mailing lists