linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH v2 4/4] mm/madvise: remove redundant mmap_lock operations from process

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]

Message-ID: <20250131175811.37fcmoevcdpeoaj6@offworld>
Date: Fri, 31 Jan 2025 09:58:11 -0800
From: Davidlohr Bueso <dave@...olabs.net>
To: Lorenzo Stoakes <lorenzo.stoakes@...cle.com>
Cc: "Liam R. Howlett" <Liam.Howlett@...cle.com>,
	SeongJae Park <sj@...nel.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>,
	Shakeel Butt <shakeel.butt@...ux.dev>,
	Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-mm@...ck.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v2 4/4] mm/madvise: remove redundant mmap_lock
 operations from process_madvise()

On Fri, 31 Jan 2025, Lorenzo Stoakes wrote:

>Keep in mind process_madvise() is not limited by IOV_MAX, which can be rather
>high, but rather UIO_FASTIOV, which is limited to 8 entries.
>
>(Some have been surprised by this limitation...!)

Ah if that is the case then I'm fine with this patch as is.

>
>So I think at this point scaling isn't a huge issue, I raise it because in
>future we may want to increase this limit, at which point we should think about
>it, which is why I sort of hand-waved it away a bit.

Agreed.

SJ, feel free to add my:

Acked-by: Davidlohr Bueso <dave@...olabs.net>