Re: [PATCH 01/19] mm: introduce MAP_SHARED_VALIDATE, a mechanism to safely define new mmap flags
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>
Date: 2017-10-13 07:12:07
Also in:
linux-fsdevel, linux-xfs
So did we settle on the new mmap_validate vs adding a new argument to ->mmap for real now? I have to say I'd much prefer passing an additional argument instead, but if higher powers rule that out this version is ok.
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
diff --git a/include/linux/fs.h b/include/linux/fs.h index 13dab191a23e..5aee97d64cae 100644 --- a/include/linux/fs.h +++ b/include/linux/fs.h@@ -1701,6 +1701,8 @@ struct file_operations { long (*unlocked_ioctl) (struct file *, unsigned int, unsigned long); long (*compat_ioctl) (struct file *, unsigned int, unsigned long); int (*mmap) (struct file *, struct vm_area_struct *); + int (*mmap_validate) (struct file *, struct vm_area_struct *, + unsigned long);
Can we make this return a bool for ok vs not ok? That way we only need to have the error code discussion in one place instead of every file system.