Messages in this thread | | | From | Matteo Croce <> | Date | Wed, 3 Apr 2019 19:08:47 +0200 | Subject | Re: [PATCH] kernel/sysctl.c: fix out of bounds access in fs.file-max |
| |
On Wed, Apr 3, 2019 at 6:40 PM Matteo Croce <mcroce@redhat.com> wrote: > > On Wed, Apr 3, 2019 at 5:51 PM Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org> wrote: > > > > On Wed, Apr 03, 2019 at 05:24:26PM +0200, Matteo Croce wrote: > > > On Wed, Apr 3, 2019 at 4:02 PM Christian Brauner <christian@brauner.io> wrote: > > > > Yeah, maybe but it still feels cleaner and more obvious to just add: > > > > > > > > static long long_zero; > > > > > > > > given that most callers actually seem to want an (unsigned) int. > > > > > > > > I don't have a strong opinion though so if others feel that it's just a > > > > waste of space consider it acked. > > > > > > > > > > Well, given that the value is zero, in this expectional case we could > > > avoid duplicating the symbol and save 4 bytes. > > > What the maintainers think? > > > > If we care about saving four bytes, we could just pass the address of > > ZERO_PAGE(0). > > That would work, work too, maybe it's a bit overkill. > int zero is always there and it's static, so enlarging it to long > should be a straightforward fix. > Obviously we can't do it for other numbers, but we can alias it just > for the zero case.. > > Regards, > > -- > Matteo Croce > per aspera ad upstream
Anyway, I'm fine with both solutions, as I have other patches in the queue which depends on this fix.
Regards, -- Matteo Croce per aspera ad upstream
| |