From: Christoph Hellwig
> Sent: 21 September 2020 15:22
>
> So looking at the various callers I'm not sure this API is the
> best. If we want to do something fancy I'd hide the struct iovec
> instances entirely with something like:
>
> struct iov_storage {
> struct iovec stack[UIO_FASTIOV], *vec;
> }
>
> int iov_iter_import_iovec(struct iov_iter *iter, struct iov_storage *s,
> const struct iovec __user *vec, unsigned long nr_segs,
> int type);
>
> and then add a new helper to free the thing if needed:
>
> void iov_iter_release_iovec(struct iov_storage *s)
> {
> if (s->vec != s->stack)
> kfree(s->vec);
> }
I didn't think of going that far.
There are 2 call sites (in scsi) that don't pass the cache.
Given that the 'buffer to free' address probably needs to
be spilled to stack forcing in into an on-stack structure
that is already passed by address is probably a good idea.
The iov_iter_release_iovec() should be static inline and just:
if (s->vec)
kfree(s->vec);
You want the test because 99.99% of the time it will be NULL.
The kernel iov[] to use is iter.iov not part of the cache.
That will be a bigger change on the io_uring code.
(The patch I didn't write.)
David
-
Registered Address Lakeside, Bramley Road, Mount Farm, Milton Keynes, MK1 1PT, UK
Registration No: 1397386 (Wales)
