[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAHp75VdS=kSWnz8FzHcdrZPaeZKsQNbzjE9mNN7BDvZA_nQpaA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 30 Aug 2023 17:29:09 +0300
From: Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com>
To: pstanner@...hat.com
Cc: Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
Andy Shevchenko <andy@...nel.org>,
Eric Biederman <ebiederm@...ssion.com>,
Christian Brauner <brauner@...nel.org>,
David Disseldorp <ddiss@...e.de>,
Luis Chamberlain <mcgrof@...nel.org>,
Siddh Raman Pant <code@...dh.me>,
Nick Alcock <nick.alcock@...cle.com>,
Maarten Lankhorst <maarten.lankhorst@...ux.intel.com>,
Maxime Ripard <mripard@...nel.org>,
Thomas Zimmermann <tzimmermann@...e.de>,
David Airlie <airlied@...il.com>,
Daniel Vetter <daniel@...ll.ch>, Zack Rusin <zackr@...are.com>,
VMware Graphics Reviewers
<linux-graphics-maintainer@...are.com>,
dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
kexec@...ts.infradead.org, linux-hardening@...r.kernel.org,
David Airlie <airlied@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/5] string.h: add array-wrappers for (v)memdup_user()
On Wed, Aug 30, 2023 at 5:19 PM <pstanner@...hat.com> wrote:
> On Wed, 2023-08-30 at 17:11 +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > On Wed, Aug 30, 2023 at 4:46 PM Philipp Stanner <pstanner@...hat.com>
> > wrote:
> > > --- a/include/linux/string.h
> > > +++ b/include/linux/string.h
> >
> > I'm wondering if this has no side-effects as string.h/string.c IIRC
> > is
> > used also for early stages where some of the APIs are not available.
> >
> > > @@ -6,6 +6,8 @@
> > > #include <linux/types.h> /* for size_t */
> > > #include <linux/stddef.h> /* for NULL */
> > > #include <linux/errno.h> /* for E2BIG */
> > > +#include <linux/overflow.h> /* for check_mul_overflow() */
> > > +#include <linux/err.h> /* for ERR_PTR() */
> >
> > Can we preserve order (to some extent)?
>
> Sure. I just put it there so the comments build a congruent block.
> Which order would you prefer?
Alphabetical.
compiler.h
err.h
overflow.h
...the rest that is a bit unordered...
> > > #include <linux/stdarg.h>
> > > #include <uapi/linux/string.h>
...
> > > +/**
> > > + * memdup_array_user - duplicate array from user space
> >
> > > + *
> >
> > Do we need this blank line?
>
> I more or less directly copied the docstring format from the original
> functions (v)memdup_user() in mm/util.c
> I guess this is common style?
I think it's not. But you may grep kernel source tree and tell which
one occurs more often with or without this (unneeded) blank line.
> > > + * @src: source address in user space
> > > + * @n: number of array members to copy
> > > + * @size: size of one array member
> > > + *
> > > + * Return: an ERR_PTR() on failure. Result is physically
> > > + * contiguous, to be freed by kfree().
> > > + */
...
> > > +/**
> > > + * vmemdup_array_user - duplicate array from user space
> >
> > > + *
> >
> > Redundant?
>
> No, there are two functions:
> * memdup_array_user()
> * vmemdup_array_user()
>
> On the deeper layers they utilize kmalloc() or kvmalloc(),
> respectively.
I guess you misunderstood my comment. I was talking about kernel doc
(as in the previous function).
> > > + * @src: source address in user space
> > > + * @n: number of array members to copy
> > > + * @size: size of one array member
> > > + *
> > > + * Return: an ERR_PTR() on failure. Result may be not
> > > + * physically contiguous. Use kvfree() to free.
> > > + */
--
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko
Powered by blists - more mailing lists