linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v5 4/4] mm/gup: clean up codes in fault_in

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: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

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

Message-ID: <35a93c36-6e97-4b33-aae5-efd1c907518a@redhat.com>
Date: Sun, 13 Apr 2025 22:09:28 +0200
From: David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>
To: Baoquan He <bhe@...hat.com>, linux-mm@...ck.org
Cc: akpm@...ux-foundation.org, osalvador@...e.de, yanjun.zhu@...ux.dev,
 linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 4/4] mm/gup: clean up codes in fault_in_xxx() functions

On 13.04.25 04:04, Baoquan He wrote:
> The code style in fault_in_readable() and fault_in_writable() is a
> little inconsistent with fault_in_safe_writeable(). In fault_in_readable()
> and fault_in_writable(), it uses 'uaddr' passed in as loop cursor. While
> in fault_in_safe_writeable(), local variable 'start' is used as loop
> cursor. This may mislead people when reading code or making change in
> these codes.
> 
> Here define explicit loop cursor and use for loop to simplify codes in
> these three functions. These cleanup can make them be consistent in
> code style and improve readability.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Baoquan He <bhe@...hat.com>
> ---

Hopefully we don't introduce anything unexpected ... do we have some 
unit test that could make use feel better, especially regarding end < start?

If not, could we add one based on some feature that ends up calling at 
least one of these functions?

Acked-by: David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>

-- 
Cheers,

David / dhildenb