From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
        id S1753658AbdLMTbI (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
        Wed, 13 Dec 2017 14:31:08 -0500
Received: from bombadil.infradead.org ([65.50.211.133]:54877 "EHLO
        bombadil.infradead.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
        with ESMTP id S1751644AbdLMTbF (ORCPT
        <rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
        Wed, 13 Dec 2017 14:31:05 -0500
Date: Wed, 13 Dec 2017 11:31:00 -0800
From: Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>
To: Jeff Moyer <jmoyer@redhat.com>
Cc: Zhen Lei <thunder.leizhen@huawei.com>,
        Alexander Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>,
        Benjamin LaHaise <bcrl@kvack.org>,
        linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>,
        linux-aio <linux-aio@kvack.org>,
        linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Tianhong Ding <dingtianhong@huawei.com>,
        Hanjun Guo <guohanjun@huawei.com>, Libin <huawei.libin@huawei.com>,
        Kefeng Wang <wangkefeng.wang@huawei.com>,
        Deepa Dinamani <deepa.kernel@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] aio: make sure the input "timeout" value is valid
Message-ID: <20171213193100.GA19700@bombadil.infradead.org>
References: <1513172572-16724-1-git-send-email-thunder.leizhen@huawei.com>
 <20171213141112.GA11217@bombadil.infradead.org>
 <x49y3m6a90r.fsf@segfault.boston.devel.redhat.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <x49y3m6a90r.fsf@segfault.boston.devel.redhat.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.1 (2017-09-22)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On Wed, Dec 13, 2017 at 11:27:00AM -0500, Jeff Moyer wrote:
> Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org> writes:
> 
> > On Wed, Dec 13, 2017 at 09:42:52PM +0800, Zhen Lei wrote:
> >> Below information is reported by a lower kernel version, and I saw the
> >> problem still exist in current version.
> >
> > I think you're right, but what an awful interface we have here!
> > The user must not only fetch it, they must validate it separately?
> > And if they forget, then userspace is provoking undefined behaviour?  Ugh.
> > Why not this:
> 
> Why not go a step further and have get_timespec64 check for validity?
> I wonder what caller doesn't want that to happen...

There are some which don't today.  I'm hoping Deepa takes this and goes
off and fixes them all up.