Re: [rfc 3/3] prctl: Add PR_SET_MM codes to tune up mm_struct entires

From: Cyrill Gorcunov
Date: Wed Nov 30 2011 - 16:06:28 EST


On Wed, Nov 30, 2011 at 10:23:10PM +0400, Cyrill Gorcunov wrote:
...
>
> > > +       switch (opt) {
> > > +       case PR_SET_MM_START_CODE:
> > > +       case PR_SET_MM_END_CODE:
> > > +
> > > +               vm_req_flags = VM_READ | VM_EXEC;
> > > +               vm_bad_flags = VM_WRITE | VM_MAYSHARE;
> > > +
> > > +               if ((vma->vm_flags & vm_req_flags) != vm_req_flags ||
> > > +                   (vma->vm_flags & vm_bad_flags))
> > > +                       goto out;
> >
> > Another random thought: given this very regular set of checks you're
> > doing, perhaps the flags should be part of a data structure instead,
> > just to reduce the size of this routine?
> >
> > struct mm_flags {
> > int req_flags;
> > int bad_flags;
> > };
> >
> > struct mm_flags opt_flags[] = {
> > ...
> > { VM_READ | VM_EXEC, VM_WRITE | VM_MAYSHARE }, /* PR_SET_MM_START_CODE */
> > { VM_READ | VM_EXEC, VM_WRITE | VM_MAYSHARE }, /* PR_SET_MM_END_CODE */
> > ...
> >
> > then do validation before the switch statement all in one place, and
> > leave the switch for more programmatic checks?
> >
> > -Kees
> >
>
> Nod! I'll update, thanks!
>

You know Kees, I tried it, and finally I think it's overheaded, so I prefer
to stick with original version (no need to duplicate same data in two differen
memory places as it'll be in case of arrays, and since the VM_ flags are
constant the former code bloats kernel lesser. Thanks anyway!

Cyrill
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/