From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail143.messagelabs.com (mail143.messagelabs.com [216.82.254.35]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with SMTP id DBD0E6B0087 for ; Thu, 14 Jan 2010 00:46:37 -0500 (EST) Received: from m3.gw.fujitsu.co.jp ([10.0.50.73]) by fgwmail7.fujitsu.co.jp (Fujitsu Gateway) with ESMTP id o0E5kZvg015533 for (envelope-from kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com); Thu, 14 Jan 2010 14:46:35 +0900 Received: from smail (m3 [127.0.0.1]) by outgoing.m3.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1D19B45DE5B for ; Thu, 14 Jan 2010 14:46:35 +0900 (JST) Received: from s3.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (s3.gw.fujitsu.co.jp [10.0.50.93]) by m3.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id CF18945DE4D for ; Thu, 14 Jan 2010 14:46:34 +0900 (JST) Received: from s3.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by s3.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id A651B1DB8044 for ; Thu, 14 Jan 2010 14:46:34 +0900 (JST) Received: from ml13.s.css.fujitsu.com (ml13.s.css.fujitsu.com [10.249.87.103]) by s3.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id AE3911DB803E for ; Thu, 14 Jan 2010 14:46:33 +0900 (JST) Date: Thu, 14 Jan 2010 14:42:50 +0900 From: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/8] vfs: fix too big f_pos handling Message-Id: <20100114144250.ebbe6601.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> In-Reply-To: <20100114051308.GA14616@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> References: <20100113140955.GA18593@localhost> <20100114051308.GA14616@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org To: Al Viro Cc: "Wu, Fengguang" , Andrew Morton , LKML , Heiko Carstens , Andi Kleen , Nick Piggin , Hugh Dickins , Linux Memory Management List , linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Thu, 14 Jan 2010 05:13:08 +0000 Al Viro wrote: > On Wed, Jan 13, 2010 at 10:09:56PM +0800, Wu, Fengguang wrote: > > From: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki > > > > Now, rw_verify_area() checsk f_pos is negative or not. And if > > negative, returns -EINVAL. > > > > But, some special files as /dev/(k)mem and /proc//mem etc.. > > has negative offsets. And we can't do any access via read/write > > to the file(device). > > > > This patch introduce a flag S_VERYBIG and allow negative file > > offsets. > > Ehh... FMODE_NEG_OFFSET in file->f_mode, perhaps? > Any method is okay for me. I was just not sure where I could modify without problem. If modifing f_mode is allowed, I'll write new version. Thank you for advice. I'm sorry that I don't have enough time this week. So, I'll try next week. I think dropping this patch itself has no big influence to this patch set. (but debug will be harder ;) Thanks, -Kame -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: email@kvack.org