Follow @Openwall on Twitter for new release announcements and other news
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Tue, 29 Aug 2017 01:14:53 -0700
From: Christoph Hellwig <>
To: Kees Cook <>
Cc:, David Windsor <>,
	"Darrick J. Wong" <>,,,
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 15/30] xfs: Define usercopy region in xfs_inode slab

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

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.