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 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.5 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS, USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A30B4C433E2 for ; Tue, 1 Sep 2020 09:13:28 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lists.ozlabs.org (lists.ozlabs.org [203.11.71.2]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 13A6A206A5 for ; Tue, 1 Sep 2020 09:13:27 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 13A6A206A5 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=lst.de Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linuxppc-dev-bounces+linuxppc-dev=archiver.kernel.org@lists.ozlabs.org Received: from bilbo.ozlabs.org (lists.ozlabs.org [IPv6:2401:3900:2:1::3]) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4BghFJ5HP7zDqTh for ; Tue, 1 Sep 2020 19:13:24 +1000 (AEST) Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; spf=none (no SPF record) smtp.mailfrom=lst.de (client-ip=213.95.11.211; helo=verein.lst.de; envelope-from=hch@lst.de; receiver=) Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=lst.de Received: from verein.lst.de (verein.lst.de [213.95.11.211]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4BghBm4CjYzDqQm for ; Tue, 1 Sep 2020 19:11:11 +1000 (AEST) Received: by verein.lst.de (Postfix, from userid 2407) id 5724168B05; Tue, 1 Sep 2020 11:11:05 +0200 (CEST) Date: Tue, 1 Sep 2020 11:11:05 +0200 From: Christoph Hellwig To: Nicolin Chen Subject: Re: [RESEND][PATCH 0/7] Avoid overflow at boundary_size Message-ID: <20200901091105.GA4959@lst.de> References: <20200831203811.8494-1-nicoleotsuka@gmail.com> <20200901073623.GA30418@lst.de> <20200901075401.GA5667@Asurada-Nvidia> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20200901075401.GA5667@Asurada-Nvidia> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.17 (2007-11-01) X-BeenThere: linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org, James.Bottomley@HansenPartnership.com, paulus@samba.org, hpa@zytor.com, sparclinux@vger.kernel.org, Christoph Hellwig , sfr@canb.auug.org.au, deller@gmx.de, x86@kernel.org, borntraeger@de.ibm.com, mingo@redhat.com, mattst88@gmail.com, fenghua.yu@intel.com, gor@linux.ibm.com, schnelle@linux.ibm.com, hca@linux.ibm.com, ink@jurassic.park.msu.ru, tglx@linutronix.de, gerald.schaefer@linux.ibm.com, rth@twiddle.net, tony.luck@intel.com, linux-parisc@vger.kernel.org, linux-s390@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-alpha@vger.kernel.org, bp@alien8.de, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, davem@davemloft.net Errors-To: linuxppc-dev-bounces+linuxppc-dev=archiver.kernel.org@lists.ozlabs.org Sender: "Linuxppc-dev" On Tue, Sep 01, 2020 at 12:54:01AM -0700, Nicolin Chen wrote: > Hi Christoph, > > On Tue, Sep 01, 2020 at 09:36:23AM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > > I really don't like all the open coded smarts in the various drivers. > > What do you think about a helper like the one in the untested patch > > A helper function will be actually better. I was thinking of > one yet not very sure about the naming and where to put it. > > > below (on top of your series). Also please include the original > > segment boundary patch with the next resend so that the series has > > the full context. > > I will use your change instead and resend with the ULONG_MAX > change. But in that case, should I make separate changes for > different files like this series, or just one single change > like yours? > > Asking this as I was expecting that those changes would get > applied by different maintainers. But now it feels like you > will merge it to your tree at once? I guess one patch is fine. I can queue it up in the dma-mapping tree as a prep patch for the default boundary change.