From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from kanga.kvack.org (kanga.kvack.org [205.233.56.17]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7C7F3E7C6F9 for ; Sun, 1 Feb 2026 00:43:15 +0000 (UTC) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) id 9CD346B0088; Sat, 31 Jan 2026 19:43:14 -0500 (EST) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 40) id 950BA6B0089; Sat, 31 Jan 2026 19:43:14 -0500 (EST) X-Delivered-To: int-list-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 63042) id 84F716B008A; Sat, 31 Jan 2026 19:43:14 -0500 (EST) X-Delivered-To: linux-mm@kvack.org Received: from relay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0017.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.17]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 756C06B0088 for ; Sat, 31 Jan 2026 19:43:14 -0500 (EST) Received: from smtpin27.hostedemail.com (a10.router.float.18 [10.200.18.1]) by unirelay02.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BFBC713BA63 for ; Sun, 1 Feb 2026 00:43:13 +0000 (UTC) X-FDA: 84394038666.27.4B3F50A Received: from tor.source.kernel.org (tor.source.kernel.org [172.105.4.254]) by imf19.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0BEF21A0002 for ; Sun, 1 Feb 2026 00:43:11 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: imf19.hostedemail.com; dkim=pass header.d=linux-foundation.org header.s=korg header.b=BbpBcpEz; spf=pass (imf19.hostedemail.com: domain of akpm@linux-foundation.org designates 172.105.4.254 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=akpm@linux-foundation.org; dmarc=none ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=hostedemail.com; s=arc-20220608; t=1769906592; h=from:from:sender:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date: message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version: content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references:dkim-signature; bh=1/N2TX5w7TG0/ptW8V2UL9YErPH+kKWXCN3zQqvUn74=; b=qV4AVsdRF0sCmGXPiXoz56DctEyOBE1G8JqJBGwDk1uUwjpl3onNshAAzDSyPojY+rLijV giyud+U/1hRkCL52N0nM2uLo12O74vR79YhVm+Wp6+E1lY++L3po6qLgvtM/JAQR2Ex0OG oan02QWzxRoQZmZU8ObvRSUXMoLNoj0= ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; imf19.hostedemail.com; dkim=pass header.d=linux-foundation.org header.s=korg header.b=BbpBcpEz; spf=pass (imf19.hostedemail.com: domain of akpm@linux-foundation.org designates 172.105.4.254 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=akpm@linux-foundation.org; dmarc=none ARC-Seal: i=1; s=arc-20220608; d=hostedemail.com; t=1769906592; a=rsa-sha256; cv=none; b=EF7aTybj3yYQFQI9IK15+TgwVNonrojfULV6W4NheTIIFZC+IIm6vFzW1/hYFRPGz02dPP b97r2ABnHWXTKE4sDRZthAQgiM+1/TqP4kazmFlcIzIOywuAsPurD5QxOtw+CwAJbDdSf8 OibTTySkJHH0it7Cq2pO7QVxDexASG0= Received: from smtp.kernel.org (transwarp.subspace.kernel.org [100.75.92.58]) by tor.source.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1071460053; Sun, 1 Feb 2026 00:43:11 +0000 (UTC) Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 8F288C4CEF1; Sun, 1 Feb 2026 00:43:10 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=linux-foundation.org; s=korg; t=1769906590; bh=N/bSjHB232qPSoeOv44GNd40TFrJjRkIvnqNHWcNv5Y=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=BbpBcpEzEMUAjgQatMPJP9qosblFzD9GPc34UqKsewAuZAK+oFHn/byEpK6W+U77S sTD/U0Nxf0Y3jHQmCE3CsrjDpNh98N9qP8FVu/11R9UEPqKeIU9z03w3+SjvogAkDB ZAvx54CfyNNwAVm4XPi/6CsBkv5hZscANmbR74ZU= Date: Sat, 31 Jan 2026 16:43:10 -0800 From: Andrew Morton To: "David Hildenbrand (Red Hat)" Cc: Kevin Lourenco , linux-mm@kvack.org, Kevin Lourenco Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm/fadvise: validate offset in generic_fadvise Message-Id: <20260131164310.048caf9636063986a8b517e6@linux-foundation.org> In-Reply-To: <1690da61-412a-457a-9bb4-1135838135da@kernel.org> References: <20251222141817.13335-1-klourencodev@gmail.com> <961095cd-59d2-454a-9b97-493d12f296a1@kernel.org> <1690da61-412a-457a-9bb4-1135838135da@kernel.org> X-Mailer: Sylpheed 3.8.0beta1 (GTK+ 2.24.33; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Rspamd-Server: rspam09 X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 0BEF21A0002 X-Stat-Signature: ap36j6dikt6kaecc6enyb36g5di3eux8 X-Rspam-User: X-HE-Tag: 1769906591-53967 X-HE-Meta: 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 mPiRkrq/ Ma7uF+Q8KcQJfdeb4jvAg/vdGSePLkzR23tbimutyH+A1xPTW2KejvtpoXwwSfoEyFA3B43kx0PDrw5BhNoYnkkRb8+mm0Px0iPOQSEYQXQeF6XFeymVxR2Pmy6ZpNrbHWw3p134bdMlnPnIUndutvyY9bfKQcDnv5k+zwjh3c+5I8zkwyR4YWGgmCSqsqji6bEhSSYtHgqZGBGKdVB0fK6SqzqbfYkH/Oa35X8c73ZS1BJRv4wNmYbTcBrFg9q1//KYm7HiBP/gwnhMG6Dn5WfqRwxfIpKjPu07Adf65MwXSvPpuiZoLsAvebb7eWx9zsVLK X-Bogosity: Ham, tests=bogofilter, spamicity=0.000000, version=1.2.4 Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Precedence: bulk X-Loop: owner-majordomo@kvack.org List-ID: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: On Tue, 6 Jan 2026 20:46:14 +0100 "David Hildenbrand (Red Hat)" wrote: > > Since I think nobody intentionally passes negative values and since > > that makes no sense semantically speaking, I think we can consider it > > Well, then why document negative length? ;) We should be as clear as > possible in the documentation. > > If POSIX would have been clearer we wouldn't have this discussion :) > > > unnecessary to update the man page right now and only think about it > > in the future if a negative offset gains a new meaning, for example. > > > > Wdyt? > > Likely we should really update the man page to reflect reality. > "Starting with Linux v7.0, posix_fadvise() will fail with ...". > > Given that FreeBSD rejects negative offsets I guess we are good. I'm still not sure what to do with this. Kevin, would you have time to update the changelog with the additional things we've discussed: linux manpages, POSIX, freebsd etc? Then please resend, cc'ing linux-fsdevel, Jan Kara and anyone else we can think of ;) Thanks.