lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2009]   [Dec]   [28]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [PATCH] [3/6] kfifo: Sanitize *_user error handling
From
Date
Am Montag, den 28.12.2009, 00:34 +0100 schrieb Andi Kleen:
> > I don't like this idea. kfifo_from_user and kfifo_to_user should have
> > the same semantics as copy_from_user and copy_to_user.
>
> Maybe they should have, but the big difference is that the source
> FIFO might not have enough data. And both conditions need
> to be reported, but not mixed together.
>
> The actual reporting of the unused length is not
> too useful anyways. It's only used very rarely for real
> c*u(), and these cases are usually misdesigned interfaces.
>
> > > I didn't fully adapt the weird "record" variants, those seem
> > > to be unused anyways and were rather messy (should they be just removed?)
> > >
> >
> > Believe it or not, it will be used in future.
>
> Normally in Linux code is only added when it's actually used.
> Otherwise it'll bitrot anyways.
>

I know a lot of places and structures inside the kernel where it is not
this case.

Stefani




\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2009-12-28 08:13    [W:0.125 / U:0.808 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site