Re: [PATCH v4 01/22] fs: Add generic_atomic_write_valid_size()

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Fri, Jun 07, 2024 at 02:38:58PM +0000, John Garry wrote:
> Add a generic helper for FSes to validate that an atomic write is
> appropriately sized (along with the other checks).
> 
> Signed-off-by: John Garry <john.g.garry@xxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
>  include/linux/fs.h | 12 ++++++++++++
>  1 file changed, 12 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/include/linux/fs.h b/include/linux/fs.h
> index 069cbab62700..e13d34f8c24e 100644
> --- a/include/linux/fs.h
> +++ b/include/linux/fs.h
> @@ -3645,4 +3645,16 @@ bool generic_atomic_write_valid(loff_t pos, struct iov_iter *iter)
>  	return true;
>  }
>  
> +static inline
> +bool generic_atomic_write_valid_size(loff_t pos, struct iov_iter *iter,
> +				unsigned int unit_min, unsigned int unit_max)
> +{
> +	size_t len = iov_iter_count(iter);
> +
> +	if (len < unit_min || len > unit_max)
> +		return false;
> +
> +	return generic_atomic_write_valid(pos, iter);
> +}

Now that I look back at "fs: Initial atomic write support" I wonder why
not pass the iocb and the iov_iter instead of pos and the iov_iter?
And can these be collapsed into a single generic_atomic_write_checks()
function?

--D

> +
>  #endif /* _LINUX_FS_H */
> -- 
> 2.31.1
> 
> 




[Index of Archives]     [Reiser Filesystem Development]     [Ceph FS]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Security]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Linux FS]     [Yosemite National Park]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Samba]     [Device Mapper]     [Linux Media]

  Powered by Linux