linux-kernel - Re: [External] Re: [PATCH] mm: rename the oldflags and parameter in memalloc_flags

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: <CACSyD1P5ksZHHRZwCr48gDVv9Wt9hXfX9PcXqrd5MpDRJkdzHA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 19 Jun 2025 11:17:58 +0800
From: Zhongkun He <hezhongkun.hzk@...edance.com>
To: Kent Overstreet <kent.overstreet@...ux.dev>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, mhocko@...e.com, linux-mm@...ck.org, 
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [External] Re: [PATCH] mm: rename the oldflags and parameter in memalloc_flags_*()

On Thu, Jun 19, 2025 at 8:07 AM Kent Overstreet
<kent.overstreet@...ux.dev> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Jun 18, 2025 at 04:43:34PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > On Wed, 18 Jun 2025 15:03:28 +0800 Zhongkun He <hezhongkun.hzk@...edance.com> wrote:
> >
> > > The variable name oldflags can indeed be misleading, because
> > > it does not store the complete original value of flags.
> > > Instead, it records which flags from the given set are not
> > > currently set. So rename it.
> > >
> >
> > Your email client is mangling the patches in strange ways.  Please send
> > yourself a patch, figure out why it didn't apply?
> >
> > > --- a/include/linux/sched/mm.h
> > > +++ b/include/linux/sched/mm.h
> > > @@ -322,21 +322,21 @@ static inline void might_alloc(gfp_t gfp_mask)
> > >  }
> > >
> > >  /**
> > > - * memalloc_flags_save - Add a PF_* flag to current->flags, save old value
> > > + * memalloc_flags_save - Add a PF_* flag to current->flags, return saved flags mask
> > >   *
> > >   * This allows PF_* flags to be conveniently added, irrespective of current
> > >   * value, and then the old version restored with memalloc_flags_restore().
> > >   */
> > > -static inline unsigned memalloc_flags_save(unsigned flags)
> > > +static inline unsigned int memalloc_flags_save(unsigned int flags_mask)
> > >  {
> > > -   unsigned oldflags = ~current->flags & flags;
> > > -   current->flags |= flags;
> > > -   return oldflags;
> > > +   unsigned int saved_flags_mask = ~current->flags & flags_mask;
> > > +
> > > +   current->flags |= flags_mask;
> > > +   return saved_flags_mask;
> > >  }
> > >
> > > -static inline void memalloc_flags_restore(unsigned flags)
> > > +static inline void memalloc_flags_restore(unsigned int flags_mask)
> > >  {
> > > -   current->flags &= ~flags;
> > > +   current->flags &= ~flags_mask;
> > >  }
> >
> > I guess so.  Maybe.  A bit.  Kent, what do you think?
>
> Eesh, seems like pointless verbosity to me. Maybe don't change it if it
> doesn't need to be changed?

Hi Kent, thanks for your feedback.
How about this version,  only change the 'old' to 'saved'.
The function does not return the old current->flags value. Instead,
it returns the subset of flags that were not previously set in current->flags,
so they can later be cleared by memalloc_flags_restore(). The name savedflags
makes this behavior clearer and avoids confusion.

 /**
- * memalloc_flags_save - Add a PF_* flag to current->flags, save old value
+ * memalloc_flags_save - Add a PF_* flag to current->flags, return saved flags
  *
  * This allows PF_* flags to be conveniently added, irrespective of current
  * value, and then the old version restored with memalloc_flags_restore().
  */
 static inline unsigned memalloc_flags_save(unsigned flags)
 {
-       unsigned oldflags = ~current->flags & flags;
+       unsigned savedflags = ~current->flags & flags;
        current->flags |= flags;
-       return oldflags;
+       return savedflags;
 }

Thanks,
Zhongkun