From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.7 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B71D2C43331 for ; Thu, 5 Sep 2019 19:56:58 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1D58120825 for ; Thu, 5 Sep 2019 19:56:59 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S2391563AbfIET4y (ORCPT ); Thu, 5 Sep 2019 15:56:54 -0400 Received: from mx2.mailbox.org ([80.241.60.215]:58904 "EHLO mx2.mailbox.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1733174AbfIET4y (ORCPT ); Thu, 5 Sep 2019 15:56:54 -0400 Received: from smtp2.mailbox.org (smtp2.mailbox.org [80.241.60.241]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-CHACHA20-POLY1305 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx2.mailbox.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DCACBA0D19; Thu, 5 Sep 2019 21:56:47 +0200 (CEST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at heinlein-support.de Received: from smtp2.mailbox.org ([80.241.60.241]) by spamfilter04.heinlein-hosting.de (spamfilter04.heinlein-hosting.de [80.241.56.122]) (amavisd-new, port 10030) with ESMTP id MUcBvZslYqK5; Thu, 5 Sep 2019 21:56:42 +0200 (CEST) Date: Fri, 6 Sep 2019 05:56:18 +1000 From: Aleksa Sarai To: Al Viro Cc: Christian Brauner , Jeff Layton , "J. Bruce Fields" , Arnd Bergmann , David Howells , Shuah Khan , Shuah Khan , Ingo Molnar , Peter Zijlstra , Christian Brauner , Rasmus Villemoes , Eric Biederman , Andy Lutomirski , Andrew Morton , Alexei Starovoitov , Kees Cook , Jann Horn , Tycho Andersen , David Drysdale , Chanho Min , Oleg Nesterov , Alexander Shishkin , Jiri Olsa , Namhyung Kim , Aleksa Sarai , Linus Torvalds , containers@lists.linux-foundation.org, linux-alpha@vger.kernel.org, linux-api@vger.kernel.org, linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org, linux-m68k@lists.linux-m68k.org, linux-mips@vger.kernel.org, linux-parisc@vger.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, linux-s390@vger.kernel.org, linux-sh@vger.kernel.org, linux-xtensa@linux-xtensa.org, sparclinux@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v12 01/12] lib: introduce copy_struct_{to,from}_user helpers Message-ID: <20190905195618.pwzgvuzadkfpznfz@yavin.dot.cyphar.com> References: <20190904201933.10736-1-cyphar@cyphar.com> <20190904201933.10736-2-cyphar@cyphar.com> <20190905180750.GQ1131@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> <20190905182303.7f6bxpa2enbgcegv@wittgenstein> <20190905182801.GR1131@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="lkob4nx2s4nikwgg" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20190905182801.GR1131@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> Sender: linux-parisc-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-parisc@vger.kernel.org --lkob4nx2s4nikwgg Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On 2019-09-05, Al Viro wrote: > On Thu, Sep 05, 2019 at 08:23:03PM +0200, Christian Brauner wrote: >=20 > > Because every caller of that function right now has that limit set > > anyway iirc. So we can either remove it from here and place it back for > > the individual callers or leave it in the helper. > > Also, I'm really asking, why not? Is it unreasonable to have an upper > > bound on the size (for a long time probably) or are you disagreeing with > > PAGE_SIZE being used? PAGE_SIZE limit is currently used by sched, perf, > > bpf, and clone3 and in a few other places. >=20 > For a primitive that can be safely used with any size (OK, any within > the usual 2Gb limit)? Why push the random policy into the place where > it doesn't belong? >=20 > Seriously, what's the point? If they want to have a large chunk of > userland memory zeroed or checked for non-zeroes - why would that > be a problem? Thinking about it some more, there isn't really any r/w amplification -- so there isn't much to gain by passing giant structs. Though, if we are going to permit 2GB buffers, isn't that also an argument to use memchr_inv()? :P --=20 Aleksa Sarai Senior Software Engineer (Containers) SUSE Linux GmbH --lkob4nx2s4nikwgg Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iHUEABYIAB0WIQSxZm6dtfE8gxLLfYqdlLljIbnQEgUCXXFoXwAKCRCdlLljIbnQ EkH6AP4mTXfGXldo6DW9pN3b8QgoKfRKIsKKRirvrHzSGLXpkgEAgJQFw7jvGxM5 R7P96Ylo52dN3tmTa+41vZfPhMozHwA= =OHll -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --lkob4nx2s4nikwgg--