[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAHk-=wiH+FmLBGKk86ung9Qbrwd0S-7iAnEAbV9QDvX5vAjL7A@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2024 13:32:26 -0800
From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To: asmadeus@...ewreck.org
Cc: Leo Stone <leocstone@...il.com>,
syzbot+03fb58296859d8dbab4d@...kaller.appspotmail.com, ericvh@...il.com,
ericvh@...nel.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux_oss@...debyte.com, lucho@...kov.net,
syzkaller-bugs@...glegroups.com, v9fs-developer@...ts.sourceforge.net,
v9fs@...ts.linux.dev, viro@...iv.linux.org.uk,
Fedor Pchelkin <pchelkin@...ras.ru>, Seth Forshee <sforshee@...nel.org>,
Christian Brauner <brauner@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: Alloc cap limit for 9p xattrs (Was: WARNING in __alloc_frozen_pages_noprof)
On Wed, 11 Dec 2024 at 13:04, <asmadeus@...ewreck.org> wrote:
>
> Christian Schoenebeck's suggestion was something like this -- I guess
> that's good enough for now and won't break anything (e.g. ACLs bigger
> than XATTR_SIZE_MAX), so shall we go with that instead?
Please use XATTR_SIZE_MAX. The KMALLOC_MAX_SIZE limit seems to make no
sense in this context.
Afaik the VFS layer doesn't allow getting an xattr bigger than
XATTR_SIZE_MAX anyway, and would return E2BIG for them later
regardless, so returning anything bigger wouldn't work anyway, even if
p9 tried to return such a thing up to some bigger limit.
No?
Linus
Powered by blists - more mailing lists