linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v6 01/34] vfs: Unconditionally set IOCB_WRITE in call_write

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

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

Date:   Wed, 18 Jan 2023 22:11:45 +0000
From:   Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>
To:     Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
Cc:     David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>,
        Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>, Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>,
        linux-block@...r.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
        Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>, Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>,
        Jeff Layton <jlayton@...nel.org>,
        Logan Gunthorpe <logang@...tatee.com>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 01/34] vfs: Unconditionally set IOCB_WRITE in
 call_write_iter()

On Mon, Jan 16, 2023 at 11:52:43PM -0800, Christoph Hellwig wrote:

> This doesn't remove the existing setting of IOCB_WRITE, and also
> feelds like the wrong place.
> 
> I suspect the best is to:
> 
>  - rename init_sync_kiocb to init_kiocb
>  - pass a new argument for the destination to it.  I'm not entirely
>    sure if flags is a good thing, or an explicit READ/WRITE might be
>    better because it's harder to get wrong, even if a the compiler
>    might generate worth code for it.
>  - also use it in the async callers (io_uring, aio, overlayfs, loop,
>    nvmet, target, cachefs, file backed swap)

Do you want it to mess with get_current_ioprio() for those?  Looks
wrong...