Re: [PATCH] fs/ntfs3: Use __GFP_NOWARN allocation at ntfs_load_attr_list()

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

 



On 2023/01/03 5:19, Michal Hocko wrote:
>> @@ -52,7 +52,7 @@ int ntfs_load_attr_list(struct ntfs_inode *ni, struct ATTRIB *attr)
>>  
>>  	if (!attr->non_res) {
>>  		lsize = le32_to_cpu(attr->res.data_size);
>> -		le = kmalloc(al_aligned(lsize), GFP_NOFS);
>> +		le = kmalloc(al_aligned(lsize), GFP_NOFS | __GFP_NOWARN);
> 
> This looks like a bad idea in general. The allocator merely says that
> something is wrong and you are silencing that. The calling code should
> check the size for reasonable range and if larger size. Moreover, if
> lsize can be really more than PAGE_SIZE this should be kvmalloc instead.

There are already similar commits.

  commit 0d0f659bf713 ("fs/ntfs3: Use __GFP_NOWARN allocation at wnd_init()")
  commit 59bfd7a483da ("fs/ntfs3: Use __GFP_NOWARN allocation at ntfs_fill_super()")

Is KMALLOC_MAX_SIZE intended to be used by callers like

  https://linux.googlesource.com/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux/+/a5a1e1f249db4e0a35d3deca0b9916b11cc1f02b%5E!

? I think that, unless there is a known upper limit defined by specification,
checking for overflow and silence like

  https://lkml.kernel.org/r/6d878e01-6c2f-8766-2578-c95030442369@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

is fine. These input are random values which do not need to succeed by using kvmalloc().





[Index of Archives]     [Linux ARM Kernel]     [Linux ARM]     [Linux Omap]     [Fedora ARM]     [IETF Annouce]     [Bugtraq]     [Linux OMAP]     [Linux MIPS]     [eCos]     [Asterisk Internet PBX]     [Linux API]

  Powered by Linux