Date: Tue, 29 Aug 2017 01:14:53 -0700 From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org> To: Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org> Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, David Windsor <dave@...lcore.net>, "Darrick J. Wong" <darrick.wong@...cle.com>, linux-xfs@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org, kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 15/30] xfs: Define usercopy region in xfs_inode slab cache One thing I've been wondering is wether we should actually just get rid of the online area. Compared to reading an inode from disk a single additional kmalloc is negligible, and not having the inline data / extent list would allow us to reduce the inode size significantly. Kees/David: how many of these patches are file systems with some sort of inline data? Given that it's only about 30 patches declaring allocations either entirely valid for user copy or not might end up being nicer in many ways than these offsets.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use? Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia and check out these guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.