[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <tencent_583360D51D354010FEE44A3A3B739D5FF506@qq.com>
Date: Thu, 21 Mar 2024 23:39:10 +0800
From: Wen Yang <wenyang.linux@...mail.com>
To: Joel Granados <j.granados@...sung.com>
Cc: "Eric W . Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>,
Luis Chamberlain <mcgrof@...nel.org>, Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
Christian Brauner <brauner@...nel.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/9] encode the values directly in the table entry
On 2024/3/21 23:21, Joel Granados wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 09, 2024 at 06:31:17PM +0800, wenyang.linux@...mail.com wrote:
>> From: Wen Yang <wenyang.linux@...mail.com>
>>
>> The boundary check of multiple modules uses these static variables (such as
>> two_five_five, n_65535, ue_int_max, etc), and they are also not changed.
> This message is a bit cryptic. I had to do a fair amount of research to
> get what you meant here. Having the context in front is OK with me, but
> I would add a bit more information so the reader does not have to go to
> the code and grep for the variables that you mean. Something like this:
> "When using a sysctl proc_handler that requires a boundary check (like
> proce_dointvec_minmax) it is common to use a const variable like n_65535
> in net/rxrpc/sysctl.c or OTHER EXAMPLES...). This is suboptimal because
> YOUR REASONS HERE"
>
>
Thanks a lot for your very considerate input – this is highly
appreciated. We will revise the change message and send v3 later.
--
Best wishes,
Wen
>>
>> Eric points out: "by turning .extra1 and .extra2 into longs instead of
>> keeping them as pointers and needing constants to be pointed at somewhere
>> ... The only people I can see who find a significant benefit by
>> consolidating all of the constants into one place are people who know how
>> to stomp kernel memory."
> I think it would be better to just link to the lore discussion.
>
>>
>> This patch series achieves direct encoding values in table entries and still
>> maintains compatibility with existing extra1/extra2 pointers.
>> Afterwards, we can remove these unnecessary static variables progressively and
>> also gradually kill the shared const array.
> Two things:
> 1. Please name the const array: sysctl_vals
> 2. What is missing from this patchset to completely kill sysctl_vals?
>
>>
>> Wen Yang (9):
>> sysctl: support encoding values directly in the table entry
>> kernel/sysctl-test: add some kunit test cases for min/max detection
>> rxrpc: delete these unnecessary static variables n_65535, four,
>> max_500, etc
>> net: ipv6: delete these unnecessary static variables two_five_five and
>> minus_one
>> svcrdma: delete these unnecessary static variables min_ord, max_ord,
>> etc
>> sysctl: delete these unnecessary static variables i_zero and
>> i_one_hundred
>> epoll: delete these unnecessary static variables long_zero and
>> long_max
>> fs: inotify: delete these unnecessary static variables it_zero and
>> it_int_max
>> ucounts: delete these unnecessary static variables ue_zero and
>> ue_int_max
>>
>> fs/eventpoll.c | 19 +-
>> fs/notify/inotify/inotify_user.c | 49 +++--
>> include/linux/sysctl.h | 108 ++++++++++-
>> kernel/sysctl-test.c | 300 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>> kernel/sysctl.c | 61 +++++--
>> kernel/ucount.c | 8 +-
>> lib/test_sysctl.c | 12 +-
>> net/ipv6/addrconf.c | 15 +-
>> net/rxrpc/sysctl.c | 169 ++++++++---------
>> net/sunrpc/xprtrdma/svc_rdma.c | 21 +--
>> 10 files changed, 571 insertions(+), 191 deletions(-)
>>
>> Cc: Eric W. Biederman <ebiederm@...ssion.com>
>> Cc: Luis Chamberlain <mcgrof@...nel.org>
>> Cc: Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
>> Cc: Joel Granados <j.granados@...sung.com>
>> Cc: Christian Brauner <brauner@...nel.org>
>> Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
>>
>> --
>> 2.25.1
>>
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists